I originally planned on modeling New Haven, but realized that no manufacturers really make what I need and being almost 16 I’ve got limited skills and money, so I need a RR to model that’s more readily available. But, I need it to fit this layout:
The two red smaller squares are stations, the larger rectangle is a freight house, the blue part is a scrap industry, the orange is a creamery, the green is lumber, and the brown is coal.
I’ve got an interest for B&O in the 60s-70s (think GP30s and such) so would I be able to pull a B&O layout off with this? If not, what other roads would fit it? I can’t use a different track plan because I’ve already started building and I can’t tear everything up and start again due to my parents and money restraints. Thanks!
There’s nothing in the track plan that really relates to any one railroad, you could model B&O or Santa Fe or whatever and it would work fine from what I can see.
Seems to me there are a fair number of New Haven engines and cars out there however, if that’s the RR you want to model. A search at the Atlas website on “New Haven” came up with quite a few hits in HO and N. Sometimes in the long run it’s cheaper to buy one good engine than two cheapo ones.
Yeah I was thinking that nothing was really specific, but how would I pull it off and make it believable-looking? And yeah I know atlass has the HH660’s but I’m looking for more of the black and orange scheme and have RS-3s and GP7s in that scheme.
How real do you want it to look? Let’s face reality that real trains don’t run in circles which is a problem for most of us. Add.to that a small railroad and you will be chasing your tail most of the time if you run more than three or four cars It doesn’t make a bit of difference which rr you model they will both have thosse problems. So what can you do?. Try putting a backdrop right through the middle so the whole rr isn’t visible. Personally I would resist the urge to have more than one or two engines. Make sure one can.be used as a switcher and for local service. Proper scenery will overcome many of the problems associated with a small layout.
Running a backdrop would be difficult in the space I’ve got… Plus I don’t have a walk-around control so I kinda want everything visable from the panel [:P] I want it to look real enough that the B&O locos fit the scene (by the way I can get a GP30 and G35 both with DCC for like $55 from a friend so I’ll probably model that road). Any tips on how to do this scenery-wise? I know I’ll have to run small trains and I don’t mind this. I’ve got an open yard down at the bottom of the layout to store extra cars so I don’t always have to run the same ones and then engine storage tracks in the bottom right hand corner so I can at least play around with 3-4 locos, but not all at the same time.
Adding a scenic divider would segnificantly add to the looks of your railroad. The trains will disappear and have a place to go. You could even have two people operating if you wanted. Since you don’t have a walkaround throttle you can either put the control panel on the end or have a main control panel on one side and a small power pack (under $5 for a used one at a train show) on the other for local operations…
I like to model B&O and all it’s incarnates {B&O C&O, Chessie, CSX.
ANy layout can fit any RR, basically as long as the scenery is reasonably appropriate to the area you are trying to replicate.SOme model railroad DO in fact “selectively compress” a certain area, spur or sub line fairly accurately, but you can run anything on any layout if you do the scenery right [that you can even do the way you want it;s your railroad] But You must remember this:
In 1963, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway officially took control of the B&O, beginning what was to become the Chessie System. Formal merger of the two railroads began in 1971, with the Western Maryland Railway being merged into the Chessie System in 1973. In 1980, the Chessie System merged with the Family Lines System to become the CSX Corporation.
So the B&O effective transitioned in 1963. WHile there would be diesels of the GP series still floating around marked B &O which are available as models, or patched for the new incarnate, in the 70’s it would mostly be chessies you would see running around, possibly labeled with their B&O or C&O heritage designated lettering on them. (that’s why you see chessie GP40s painted chessie but the number says XXXX B&O under it.
So if you want to model the seventies, you need chessie system more than B&O. 1951 and you’re talking B&O with some steam possibly. ALso B&O F series and GP7 &9s.
{Most railroads may run point-to-point, but you can run continuos loop if you want, and don’t have to have divider if you cant get to the other side to view it. It’s your railroad run it how you like. My small HO scale layout is similar to the one you picked. I like to swap out the B&O and etc. for chessie or Csx once in awhile.}
Any chance of hanging a mirror above the layout to see over some sort of ridge?
If you want to model B&O, you have the choice of rolling countryside in Maryland to
Appalachian Mountains back to Midwestern flatlands. Your scenic divider could be as simple as tall trees made out of dried weeds with ground foam just to give you a visual break between the two sides but still be able to see over.
And if you really like the New Haven in orange and black, it’s not too difficult to paint and decal engines in that scheme, but of course GP30s and -35s wouldn’t be appropriate
I’m thinking I’ll model the 60’s probably; maybe the late 60’s later on if I want to run a Chessie diesel. Walk around will be really uncomfortable because there’s only a foot of space on the far 8 foot side, granted I am pretty skinny but it’s annoying to work there so I can imagine it’ll be not so great to stand there. I think with the right scenery and structures it’ll look good. Granted this is my first layout so I’m not expecting anything really great [:P] i like the idea of switching from B&O to CSX and such, I may try that because it’ll give me something to do once this layout’s done. I guess I just need scenery tips now to make it look believable. I’m assuming using the two colors or ballast for the mainline and the spurs would be good? Looks like I need a limestone colorish ballast for the mainline and I’m not sure for the spurs.
If you have little space, then it would quite possibly be a very good idea to not build a 4x8 foot H0 scale layout.
Some of the challenges with a 4x8 continuous run H0 scale layout:
a) takes a lot of floor space - due to table depth you would need room for two foot aisles on three sides for access, so you need at least 8 x 10 feet (80 square feet) of floor space to do a 32 square feet layout.
b) forces fairly sharp turn back curves - 48" of depth means the curve maximum can have a radius of 22" (a diameter of 44") - that dictates that equipment run on the layout should be fairly short - preferably short enough that curve radius is no more than 3 x length of rolling stock. For 22" radius, that means engines and rolling stock shorter than 22 / 3 = 7.3". In H0 scale, that means preferably 50 foot cars or smaller.
c) If you cannot run a view block down along the spine of the table to segment the layout visually into two scenes, the same trains will pass your position first going left close to you, and then going right along the rear of the table a few seconds later.
Some simple possible alternatives:
If you need to have everything on a single easy to make rectangular table, and you want continuous run, go to N scale, get a cheap 30" x 6.7 foot hollow core door, and make an N scale Hollow Core Door layout.
That would have as much room for N scale scenery and track as 5 x 12 foot table in H0 scale, except that 30" deep is so narrow that you can reach
Btw - if you for political reasons (i.e parents) cannot take up your track, take the 4x8 foot sheet of plywood,saw it into a different shape and relay the track in a different way, then I guess you will just have to go with the track plan you already have (poor access to whichever half of your layout is only one foot away from the wall and all).
What you have there is a fairly generic 4x8 layout plan. You can always claim that that the track plan represents pretty much whatever you like, from a Colorado mining town in the 1890s to Brooklyn warehouses in 1943 to a logging layout in New Hampshire in the 1920s to a modern industrial park in Wisconsin in 2010 (or something else entirely), and with the right buildings and scenery it certainly can look nice enough.
But it might be worth considering whether what your parents would ban would be cost of you discarding all your tracks and engines, and wanting to buy new ones (possibly in a different scale), or whether they actually would deny you a chance to take apart your layout, and try a different approach reusing the same components you already have.
Of course, if you have fastened down the track in such a way that you can’t get them up again in a condition where you can reuse them, then that is a moot point. Then you might as well just continue on the path you are on, and just claim that the tracks represents whatever you want it to represent.
Smile,
Stein, who probably should not comment on track plans before I have had my morning coffee
with small engines like that I would not be afraid of 15 inch radius for switching areas, lots can be added in the middle because of that.
I am planning 15 inch radius on my South Shore in one switching area, I found my 700 class can run on 15 inch and its a 3 axle truck, that makes it possible to model a prototype location albiet condensed form is a relatively small module area. Should get interesting.
Don’t be afraid to cross tracks around in the middle, makes it more interesting.
Thats a curious way to do a 4x8 there as a walk in, I woulda done that years ago.
