In the June 2004 issue of MR starting on page 48 there is a beautiful
layout shown the Emporia Subdivision modeled by Stephan and Cinthia Priest.
My question is this: I have a room for my layout that’s approx 16 X 24 I
want to set up a Little empire of my own in the space but since my
space in far smaller and I want to run Point to Point operations with the
ability to run continuous operations for the kids. I further don’t think that I
would need a second level since I don’t want a helix either. Is this plan a
good one to modify to my needs I know nothing of planning a really good
layout my others have all been 4x8 or 4x10 so this is a new frontier for me. I do
not want to copy exactly what the Priest have done as that wouldn’t be the
right thing to do.
I really like the Idea of a shelf layout since it allows me to limit
how much scenery I have to build and maintain plus it lets me concentrate
on the big picture the trains. I also do not want a large staging yard as my
operations will center on my fictional road and it limited customer
base with some through freights from other roads who have trackage rights.
I have a 16-foot x 2-foot area started but after looking at this layout
in MR I really like the continuous running possibility. That leads me to
another question, If I want to have a minimum radius of 36" will that
mean that I will have to use an area of 6 feet to make this turn around
possible like the diagram on pg 51 shows? I think the larger radius would look
better for me as I have a true love for the large modern diesels like SD40-T,
Dash-8, ACC4400CW, SD70’s and my newest favorite is the GE ES44AC (THE
GEVO). So in order for these large 6 axle engines to look right I think
the larger radius would be better right???
It’s impossible to answer your specific questions because I do not have that issue. But I want to tell you how I did it.
I saw a very nice trackplan in Model Railroader. I liked it so much so I decided to build it. But my room was smaller then the room in the magazine so what could I do about it? I just scanned the trackplan, and scaled it in Photoshop to fit my room. I know that this is not possible if the original room is much bigger then the room you have. But I tried it and measured the radius to check if it was possible, and in my case it was. I also drawed a grid on the trackplan (10 x 10 cm) so it’s pretty easy to measure everything. [2c]
First, you can reach other levels without a helix. The alternative is a no-lix — a grade that goes around the outside of the layout (along the walls) rather than in a relatively smaller circle. See this thread for more discussion… http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=40889
(With a room the size of yours, another level wouldn’t seem necessary.)
Second, what scale are you planning to use ? Often, a plan that is originally in HO-scale can be used for N-scale quite easily since N-scale is just slightly more than half the size. For example, an HO-scale plan for a room 20x20 can (with minor tweeking) fit in a 12x12 room in N-scale. Even if you use the original scale, you can adjust it to fit your space by selectively editing elements — adjust the length of straight sections; remove portions you deem unnecessary for your planned operations; use a single mainline instead of a double; etc. As long as critical elements (curves, grades, bridges, turnouts, etc.) are in their correct location (relative to each other), you should be able to adjust the plans to suit your space.
I’m about to close on a new basement (with attached house) and have almost the same space that you’ve got: 15x25. I’m in the very rough footprint planning stages now.
My LAST layout was a triple decker, in a 6x25 area with a 6x8 blob on one end (the layout was a fat P shape). In essence, the layout was one big helix, crawling around the walls continuously (I call these layouts corkscrews instead of nolixes, since the entire layout IS a helix!) I was able to get three scale miles of track out of that layout, with 2.5% grades and 12" of clear seperation between decks. While not a perfect design (I’d have preferred an easier grade and about another 4"-6" between decks) it did what I wanted to have on a layout: point to point operations, lots of nothing between stations, and a long mainline.
My new space more than doubles the area I’ll have for a layout (and I won’t even be using 2/5 of the basement!), which will allow me to expand on the same basic theme of the old layout. Instead of three decks, I’ll have two, and end up with a lighter 1.5% grade (but I won’t increase train length; too long a train swamps layouts. Notice that the ATSF layout you’re using for reference only runs 12 car trains!). With 14 feet of width, I’ll be able to add a center peninsula, which will dramatically increase my run, from three scale miles to five. So far, it looks like I’ll be settling on a layout footprint that looks like a big inverted U with a G stuck inside the middle (I tried to draw a sketch, but the message box didn’t like it).
There are two peninsulas in the design, which are double ended with a dividing backdrop. The layout will basically be one foot wide shelves, with two foot wide areas for the yards on either end. The lower peninsula will only have one level, and will pop out on the second level to the right. I’m not done fiddling with this design (heck, I have to fini***he basement first!) and it might change completely, but this basic design WILL work. You mig
[quote]
[i] I do
not want to copy exactly what the Priest have done as that wouldn’t be the
right thing to do.
Why not??? I don’t think that the person who planned the original layout would be offended at all, if it was me I would be honored to know that my ideas were useful to someone else. Anyway take the base plan, fit it to your size of room and modify it to your desires. Add a spur here and a passing track there, take our a switch here, until you get what you want. In the words of Bob Ross, it’s your world!
Randy Johnson
There is nothing wrong with using,modifying or adapting a published plan for your own use. My first layout was straight out of John Armstrong’s book “Track Planning for Realistic Operation”. Every layout I have built since then has used other ones for inspiration. The goal is to come up with a track plan that does what you want it to within the limits of your space, time, and money.
Enjoy
Paul
Great idea gentlemen, I forgot to mention this will be in HO scale, I am now thinking about the around the room incline as that would give me more mainline with additional sidings and towns to visit. With my six axle engines I like the idea of large radius turn but I may need to scale them down to allow more room and a center peninsula might work in there as well. I am going to have to go get one of John Armstrongs books it may help!
please keep the suggestions comming guys all help is welcome.
I agree orsonroy, you don’t truely need those 36" radius curves. Large diesels such as the ones you love look just fine on 30". Some would even say that they look good on curves as tight as 24". But, it is all just a matter of opinion. Choose whatever you think makes them look good, without going too large. I believe most articulated steam will run on a minimum of 24"-26". Now, this won’t look as realistic as it could, some people are just fine with that.
And with stealing a track plan. It isn’t truely stealing. The plans are not copyrighted. “Immitation is the highest form of flattery,” my friend. If you choose to copy from the Priests, you could easily get in touch with them, and bounce ideas around, and ask for suggestions on a track plan they know best.
As a psgr train freak of the first order I sympathise w/ your concern for radii and big power. One way of having your cake and eating it too is to “hide” half of the curve. The more visible half (towards the aisle) gets the wide radius but runs behind a building or hill where it tightens down to the operational minimum safely out of sight.
i think you’ll have to be really careful trying to squeeze the 25 x 35 emporia sub into a 16 x 24 room . i think you’ll also have to reduce the number of yard tracks (so the yards aren’t so long) rather than just chop out all the tracks between towns.
the emporia sub layout is a multi-level no-helix design , if you’re going to copy it i’d say go for all of it , if you leave out the second level including 3 towns , a long stretch of main line , and the west end staging yard.
36" radius does mean that a return loop will be 6’ . it’s actually going to take more space than that unless you’re going to run the track right on the edge of layout which a) looks bad , b) gives you no chance of missing the floor if there is a derailment . so you’re looking at least 6’4"
erimer thanks for pointing out my mistake you are correct it might just be a 30 inch radius I was kind of quessing on the measurement. The emporia is actually in a “L” configuation in its overal shape since the had to place a kick out into there garage. I have room to shuffle some of the track arrangment around to allow for some staging yards for my layout I dont belive I will need as much staging as they have used.
The more answers I get the more it is causing me to make changes and for the first time I am actually getting a good idea of what it is that I want to build and how it may look. keep them comming guys your experience is really helping me work out all the problems.
Will,
I don’t know what the layout you are talking about has, but having point-to-point and continuous operations is easily obtained by installed reversing loops or wyes. I have two main lines that are continuous, but I have 2 rev. loops and 1 wye at strategic points giving me the pt. to pt. operation capabilities.
My layout is about the size you are talking about. Please feel welcome to take a look at my photo storage link and view the layout plan (page 2). Maybe you can pick up an idea there.
Don’t reinvent the wheel; if you see something that strikes a chord in you, build it. I just recently saw that excellent layout that electrolove posted, and I think it is marvelous. I intend to take a stab at it. I didn’t create it, but kudos to the man who did!
Don’t box yourself in! When you get blinkers on and won’t accept changes, or won’t compromise, you really lose out by being that rigid. Your layout has to last you for a considerable while. Wouldn’t it be a shame if it sat there, lasting and lasting, and you hated it because it fell short in some way? Step back at times, give a hard second look, or better still, invite a knowledgable person in to see what you are doing, and think twice before you discard the impressions.
While the general rule is that larger curves are desirable, that generalization becomes a millstone around your neck if you have to stick with a given footprint or plan, and if you aren’t prepared to reduce the radii. Adjust, learn, compromise, and do. That’s how great layouts get built.