At some point the viewer cannot take in the whole layout nor really experience the movement of one train around the whole layout. Even with a wireless walk around throttle you only experience either the train or part of the layout depending on what you focus on.
In real life we experience trains in the same two ways. Sadly, where I live, the experience of riding “with” the train is only available on my local transit LRT (which absurdly I still enjoy riding occasionally, cheapest train ride available ). I can visit the largest train set in my City, a pair of 0-4-0 switchers running an oval hauling very old coaches (but it has a big Wye AND a turntable and roundhouse!!). I can ride on those two trains but I need an entry pass to the whole Heritage Park which is a little pricey if I just want a train ticket. Mind you the annual “railway days” experience is worth the admission price if you’re a railroader.
Otherwise, prototype trains are experienced as a bystander watching the train movements from a stationary position. I suppose out West here you could become a train chaser viewing a moving train while driving but that gets old pretty quickly. The main highways follow the main railroads pretty closely for obvious reasons.
You do not actually need a large layout to experience the same things from your model railroad. 10’x20’ is more than enough. In N scale about half that will do.
For my money, for the amount of work a well built and well designed layout involves you should aim for the SMALLEST layout that gives you the experience you are looking for.
For train watching 10x20 is enough. For operations, viewing train movements as if a trackside or aerial observer then 10’x2’ is enough.
Otherwise, you need to go really big if you want to “go on a train ride” through realistically distanced scenery and N scale starts to look very attractive.
i think the above desire is unrealistic in a 14x17’ space
while estimating what you need (or want) may be interesting, i think recognizing what you can do with what you have is essential
i think it will be less frustring to recognize what you can do with the space you have and limit the size of locomotives, passenger cars and trains that fit the space.
Having participated in this forum for a while now, and based on what everyone seems to want, the answer is you need more space than you think. A lot more.
Obviously that varies from person to person. I had built a 10x18’ around the walls layout and operatoin wise it wasn’t very satisfying such a short run.
That is very true. I managed to fit in everything that I need for my next layout, but if I had 4 times the space, everything would fit a whole lot better.
Just train watching takes much more space or it will become boring for most people.
The best train watching layout I have seen belonged to a man named Paul in Iona Lakes, Florida. It was 20 by 30, N scale, and only had two visible turnouts. The scenery was stunning. The neighborhood section was amazing.
Paul basically built a series of highly detailed dioramas that his collection of trains ran through.
That worked for him, it would never work for me.
Even in such a large space and N scale he said it got kind of tiresome just watching trains.
It could be just me, but I doubt it since I have read so much on this forum from guys who just enjoy running trains. This would seem to be especially true for a lone wolf. I can see where operations might be fun in a club setting or on a home layout with multiple operators.
But, for me, as a lone wolf, I would feel silly conducting “operations”, using way bills, train orders, switch lists. That to me is “playing with trains”. I surely don’t mean that as a criticism of those who do; it just is not for me.
I have participated in operations on some amazing layout, but at home, all I want to do is run trains and shuffle freight cars around while my music plays.
Yeah. I’m just saying that for the vast majority of people the ‘space’ is fixed, and it requires a hard look at the reality of the situation. Then adjust the ‘wants’ to fit.
It would be nice to have a gymnasium or airplane hangar out back. But that might require a crew of ten to build and maintain the thing, and an AmEx Black with no upper limit . . .
Well, since I decided to add the landscaping into the house remodel before I get a layout room, we are looking at a significant additional delay. I am building very permanent landscape borders around the gardens, and installing a new irrigation system and sod. This was not in the original scope of the project.
i guess this topic has derailed … but the following gave me pause
this makes me think that the layout should be designed for this. there don’t need to be any sidings or industrial tracks, just track running between “parts unknown”.
parts unknown could simply be staging areas.
and operation could be automated to select a train (or possibly 2), align the turnouts, run it out from staging, around the layout and back into the other side of staging.
such an automated control system could be relatively simple and would be satisfying to watch while drinking beer.
Great point. Reality is a hard thing to negotiate with.
I knew the size of my next space 4 years ago. That has given me SO MUCH TIME to think about what I really want and what can fit.
I have stated before, I am terrible at track planning, but with enough time, I seem to have resolved all my “Must Haves”. I moved the location of an interchange track, figured out staging for the outside loop, managed to find a way to make the yard function, etc.
I needed to drop almost all my “Want To Haves” from the plan. Having built several previous layouts gave me the personal wisdom to know what I can live without.
Play time fun and creative model photography are the most important for me.
Absolutely true.
My layout room (and my entire house) are being remodeled to include wheelchair access to everything. Not needed now, but I know several people that lost access to their trains due to mobility issues.
Someday I might be sitting in my chair, beer in hand, watching my trains, and still enjoying my hobby as best as I can. Maybe at this point the industrial tracks will no longer be used.
I find myself feeling guilty about my current layout.
It is a large layout, and it is set up to run trains in and out of a 10-track passenger train station. It has a large engine servicing facility featuring a 130’ turntable and a 9-stall roundhouse. It has a 6-track coach yard and a 6-track freight yard. It has 11 large freight houses complete with sidings to load and unload LCL cars.
That said, I use none of it. I am exhausted from a 3-year effort to build the layout and test the track work, the locomotives, and the rolling stock. I keep telling myself, let’s go down to the layout and use all of these features. But, so far, I haven’t done it.
I’ll go with Amtrak California Zephyr which is the name I mentioned earlier and is the correct name of the train I am modeling on the D&RGW when it began running across the system in July 1983
From the wiki:
[quote]
In 1983, the D&RGW elected to join Amtrak, citing increasing losses in passenger operations. Amtrak re-routed the San Francisco Zephyr over the D&RGW’s Moffat Subdivision between Denver and Salt Lake City, its original preference from 1971. The change was scheduled for April 25, but a mudslide at T
I’m going from memory but I think in the first Railroads You Can Model going way back to the 1970s, the Tehacapi Loop had such a concept. It had staging yards at either end and the loop was used as a stage for a parade of trains going back and forth over the loop. I think the original 101 Track Plans book had a similar concept. I have both those books packed away and I would need to find them to verify that. This kind of operations doesn’t require switching at all. Trains appear on stage in a logical sequence. Tehacapi was a single track line but had a passing siding that would allow trains in opposite directions to meet.
PS. Is there anything that you can do while drinking beer that isn’t satisfying?
In agree completely that this is all personal. One signature tag on this site reminds us of the governing rule: my railroad, my rules.
My purpose was two fold: to give a target size below which operations likely wouldn’t satisfy a modeller and to emphasize that there are the two elements to enjoy and a layout only needs to fulfil one element to be successful: viewing trains engaged in operations ( passing through from staging to staging, assembling or breaking up trains, setting out or picking up cars, loading or unloading) requires a lot less space than virtual train rides through your scenery which require either two turn back loops (lots of width) or a decent point to point distance.
