First off, I normally do not refer to myself in the third person as the subject of this post may imply.
I was made aware that there was a long thread on the subject of my layout being better because it is smaller by another poster, so I thought I would clear the matter up and explain what I meant.
My layout is not better than a bigger layout, it is better for me than a larger layout because it got me to the point I wanted to be, at the quality level I wanted, and for the amount of time and money I had to spend. My first layout was large and required a lot of money to build, and I just did not make very much money at that time. First off, wood is expensive, and good wood is even more expensive. My first layout required large amounts of plywood, and since I wanted to use good quality 3/4" plywood for the subroad bed and it was costing me a small fortune. When I started building the first layout my wife and I just got married, bought a house, had two kids, and had very low paying jobs. I could only afford a sheet of plywood every few months. My larger layout had a big staging yard on a lower level which required a helix to reach the first level. To build that helix and staging yard, plus the Atlas code 100 flex track, took me a very long time because I had to buy small amounts of those materials over a very long time. After five years I only had the staging yard done, the helix built, and the visible tracks into the main yard which was located just as you exited the staging yard. I did have most of the lower level benchwork in and about 80% of the subroad bed in before I stopped construction.
That first layout I was building had nice wide aisles and 36" min mainline radius with #6 and #8 turnouts. There was a nice long run up a grade and over a few bridges, and some tunnels. The layout had more of an open Appalachian mountain feel with coal tipples spread along the line and even had space for a branchline that split off the main a ways up the mainline from the y
Thanks for the information and the additional pictures. I was looking at the article just the other night, and really enjoyed the photograpy.
My “resource limitation” is primarily time. It took me 5 years to build my 5x12 foot HO layout. I had wanted to build a bigger layout, but in retrospect, this was the right way to go. I didn’t get in too deep and get overwhelmed by a project that was not realistic in my time frame. Now, I have a bit more space to work with, so I’m adding on to my layout in a controlled fashion.
thank you for sharing your views with us. It was a pleasure, reading your explanation seeing some more pictures of your great layout.
I am in 100% agreement with your statements - the size of a layout has nothing to do with the fun you get out of building and operating it - unless you bite off a chunk you can´t swallow.
Hope to see and read more about your excellent and inspiring work!
I really love the picture of the look down the aisle between Derby and Appalachia. I can imagine walking down the aisle and feeling like I am at Appalachia.
and one more of just me at the end of the Derby / Appalachia aisle.
and one of me at the old Appalachia yard. If you will notice I first had a Walthers coaling tower and the track arrangement was different, the actual layout was done about four years ago but there were some areas I wanted to redo, the engine terminal was one of them. Also, MR made a mistake on the track plan, the track they labeled as “Roanoke Mainline” going behind my furnace is not the mainline to Roanoke, it is a long yard track that we use to build trains going to staging. The track going to staging goes to Kingsport TN where there is a junction going east and west to Roanoke and Knoxville. The 0-8-0 in the second picture is on the yard lead which MR showed as a mainline, the mainline is two the left of the 0-8-0, both the branchline from Roda and the mainline join just across the road at KR tower and goes between the yard and the engine terminal, making my yard a true stub terminal. The track behind the furnace was an after thought, after a few operating sessions it seemed like adding the track would ease the congestion at the yard.
here is a shot that shows the engine service area when I first built it. When I first built it I though it looked a little plain. Also, the turntable was the 1st gen Walthers turntable and it did not work well at all. when Walthers came out with their ready built turntable I purchased one with the idea of just replaceing the turntable, that night I had most the engine terminal tore out with a plan to redo the track arrangement, I wanted the look of a busy and crowded engine terminal that was trying to fit in everything they needed in a space that was too small, plus show an expansion for a “new” diesel service track that looked pretty freshly installed.
before
after the remodel.
some of the new structures included sand, house, oil tanks, fuel tanks, lots of power poles, ice house, oil house, cinder hoist, and blow down drains.
I’ve often built a new railroad when the operating sheme didn’t satisfy me. Now I’m retired and looking at the money too. And at the time you need for building a layout!
Thank you for your great work and sharing with us.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Your message (and the story in MR) could not have come at a better time. I am in the exact same position: having to re-evaluate my time, space, and money available for a layout. I appreciate the “food for thought” you have given me.
Thanks for the additional posts and photos on your layout. I enjoyed them all, as well as the great article in MR. Just like you, I found that smaller is a fast track to a much more manageable project and faster enjoyment of the finished layout. The layout I’m working on on my patio has been a lot more enjoyable just because it’s smaller.
Thanks for the update and the additional pictures. Too bad to see it go. I was hoping to see some of the bones of the layout incorporated into your new one, but it sounds like it will be new from the ground up.
You know, the thread you were referring to kind of got diverted into a debate over whether or not small layouts were better than large layouts, which, of course, was NEVER the topic of your article. It was either misunderstood by some or a some comment by a poster was taken the wrong way by another. The article was clearly referring to your specific situation.
Thank you for your further narrative Jeff. I am now convinced that you will soon join the list of some of the top modelers in our hobby and I am looking forward to following the progress of your new layout as much as I enjoyed following the progress of John Allen when I was a kid. What will be the theme of your narrow gauge RR?. Peter Smith, Memphis
Jeff, congratulations with the publication of your layout! It is entirely worthy if I am allowed to be the judge. I expect your next effort will have its own story in time, and I wish you the best of success as you define it.
while doing research for building the coke ovens at Roda I was loaded a book on the Mann’s Creek Railroad, long story short, the Mann’s Creek railroad was a 3’ guage rr built to haul coal eight miles from a coal mine down Mann’s Creek gorge to the C&O at Sewell, the coal was first converted to coke and in the later years they shipped both coke and sized coal. I used the many photos from the book to help build my coke ovens, but the more I studied the book and read the stories in it the more interested I became in leaving the “mainline” modeling and became interested in modeling a true shortline backwoods mining railroad that served a specific industry.
back in the early 80s’ I built some HOn3 stuff but I was never really happy with it, so when I was considering doing narrow gauge again I decided I would do a bigger scale so I test built one of the Mann’s creek hopper cars in O scale (narrow gauge) just to see if I would like it. I really enjoyed the level of detail that is easy to reach in O scale and I enjoy that it is possible to use more scale sized materials and they are not as fragile and fussy as they are in HO. I also like the “up close” and personal feel you get with O scale.
I purchased some of the Bachmann On30 stuff and I bought a brass On3 shay to see what I was getting involved with before I just up and tore out my layout. What I found was the products in On30 really run well, they are also heavy and pull really well for their size. When I was messing with HOn3 it seamed like the locomotive had a hard time just pulling their tenders around, much less a string of cars up steep twisting grades. The Brass On3 shay was a bit of an indulgence, but I wanted to see what they were like, if it could be made to run like the On30 stuff and how it would handel tighter curves. At the moment my thoughts are to keep the shay On3 and regauge the Bachmann stuf
Like all of the others have already said, it was a thrill to hear from you first hand, to read so much from you on your thought process, and a great explanation of the timetable that you adhered to in building your current layout.
Your layout is magnificient and, of course, you are one of those guys that the rest of us love to hate because of the skill and beauty put into your railroad. I love my layout, a 22’x42’ sceniced double mainline, but I wince at the unlikely possibility of having my layout featured in MRR. I simply have a long way to go to achieve the quality level that you have accomplished.
I do plead guilty to being one of those who questioned how you could spend years working on your layout only to have a train run just a few feet. From the moment I saw the cover page of the current issue and saw that statement, I winced. I stand by that reaction but that is, in no way, a criticism of your layout or your methodology of getting to the point that you are at today. It’s just that the thought of spending years working on the layout without the pleasure of at least running an engine or train more than a few feet boggled my mind. On the other hand, a great artist does not have the pleasure of sitting back and viewing his painting until after he has finished one. Undoubtedly, the pleasure is in the work in progress.
I hope, now that you have joined the forum, that you will stick around and share with us a lot more. As they say, welcome aboard!
