Here’s a possible design for the layout that I hope to be able to build. This is assuming that I can convince my parents to allow me the space to put this in. Otherwise I’m probably going to have to use some other form of a shelf…
Hi, For a first modest design and commitment, that is quite reasonable. It is varied and interesting, and I don’t see any major errors that jump out at me…except for in the yard. At lower right, near the inside edge of the bench, you should plan for at least one runaround track It is otherwise a long triple siding, and not much of a yard per se. About halfway up that same edge, you should have a small track going from the close edge track right over to the track furthest away traveling “north-east”. Just to its southernmost turnout, you would have a mirror image version traveling from that close track “south-east” right across to the third. This way, your switcher or prime movers can move themselves out of the string and get somewhere else.
One more really spiffy addition, to make it more prototypical, is to have a track come off the third yard rail, the one closest to the turntable, from about halway down its length, crossing the green track that eventually joins up with the yard butt, and affording a second access/exit from your turntable. As you have it now, only one way in or out. If an engine stops dead entering or leaving that one approach, for some reason, how will others meant to do work that day leave the roundhouse?
Hopefully others will add their comments. I hope, too, that you are able to convince your parents that you mean business and will patiently and methodically execute this plan so that they learn something about you!
IN addition to what selector says, a runaround is needed for your industrial yard. As it is you can only switch 3 sidings–which three depends on which direction the train is heading.
Thanks for the info guys [:)]
Selector - is this what you had in mind as far as the runaround track and secondary connection to the TT? I didn’t quite understand how you were working in the crossovers between the three interchange tracks though… I couldn’t get anything to fit “right”
SpaceMouse - where should I put the runaround? between the two “southernmost” sets of track?
I just realized that I completely forgot the scale and other important things in my initial post (sorry guys)
Scale : HO
ERA: Transition (or thereabouts)
Min Radius: 18" (In the interchange), 22" everywhere else
Prototype - None as far as the trackage goes (that I know of), though the locos will all be in PRR livery
I know that the curves may pose a problem for the interchange trackage, though I figure that with 40’ (and shorter) cars, I shouldn’t have too much to worry about.
Sort of. You created another length of green track, and then you added a short track to the turntable. That last track is what I meant, but not the newer green you added above it. Instead, come directly from the closest of the three brown or tan coloured tracks comprising a yard. Start halfway down that closest tan track, at roughly the same angle as the bit that now meets the turntable, and join the two seamlessly. That is what I had in mind.
So, to be clear, you added a new turnout up top, and then drew in a new dark green track curving down and joining your third tan yard track closest to the TT. I would erase that part, and where the new TT entry meets the pre-eixsting green track and crosses it, keep the general angle of that track and meet the closest yard tan coloured track about halfway down its length. It may not be the best position, so you can ajust, but the main thing is to allow redundancy into and out of your roundhouse. You don’t need this new green track you added off the top and joining the yard at the hip.
ok… I’m a bit lost then, as you also suggested a passing track for the switcher/other motive power - and this was about the best I could figure to incorporate both the passing track and the redundant connection to the TT … Also the darker green trackage is more forgiving - #6 TO’s and 20" curve, as opposed to the #4 TO’s and 18" curves of the three interchange tracks.
I also don’t exactly know how I could get the cross tracks fit in (the ones you described as going “northeast” and “southeast” - as even with #4’s one crossover (ie northeast or southeast) takes up the entire length of the straight trackage for the interchange… with a little bit of re-working, i could get a “southeast” crossover section, using a double slip for the center track just to the south of the curves on the interchange tracks - although I’m not sure if this would actually accomplish anything, other than give me something else I have to worry about while spotting the cars…
You need both! You need a diagonal track that crosses from one of your tan yard tracks (in both locations, by the way, both yards) over to the middle of the three, and then continues to the third. Then, a few scale feet from where that track meets the third yard track, have another going across all three tracks, but in the other direction. This would create a path from track #3 going NW to track #1, along #1 for 50’, then crossing back over to #3 on the second crossover track. What that allows your switcher to do is to leave a string on one track, move to the closest turnout, reverse on the diverging route over to the adjacent yard track, move along it to the rear of the string via the second crossover and hook up to what he wants to move. I hope you follow that. You need two diagonal tracks that allow the switcher to run around to the rear of the string of cars he just dropped off. Your first posted diagram has him going all the way to the end of the yard,
I was working on this last night, but forgot to post it - I think it incorporates all of the suggestions that you guys have made (or at least those I could figure out how to fit)
Selector - I think I have the crossovers right now. Because I couldn’t fit it any other way, the interchange is (essentially) cut down to two tracks, so the third (closest to the TT) has taken on the role of runaround track. I think it should server the purposes of “small interchange” rather well…
SpaceMouse - this is what you meant for the runaround track(s), right?
The green track in the right side is great. I don’t like how you brought your tracks together in the triple wye. It kind of ruins the industrial area. You could easily fit 6-9 inudstries in there before. Now it maybe will service 2-4.
OK, looking at it now, I don’t much like it either (yet another reason to not make changes to designs while somewhat tired - LOL).
y’know, in thinking about it - I hope i have the room measurements right… LOL. I know the room is 10’ x 11’, but now that I think about it, I don’t honestly know if I have the dimensions correct for the walls (ie the wall with the door being the 10’ one). Although rearranging this to fit the other way won’t be too difficult - especially since i’ll get 11’ for the interchange/engine facilities.
OK, I think that I’ve finally worked all the kinks out.
Other than the slight error of having the runaround track in red, everything is right. The two sidings off the runaround track are for the switcher and cabooses.
Selector - would this work as well as having the crossover to the interchange’s runaround track (ie in a portotypical sense)? I’m mainly concerned with the fact that the track that it was crossing over was curved - and I’d more likely than not have to make the crossover… something that is a little beyond my skills at the moment.
Yes, I think you have done okay with this…a big improvement. So, you have essentially created a run-around/escape track for the TT, and you can get around any stalled or derailed or otherwise broken locomotives that foul the single track you had previously. Good show. The two new turnouts in the lower yard are much better now for getting around.
The new red tracks are much like a team track, so you can add a ramp between them running along their length, and have an industry or two right close.
I am happy you peservered. Now, once you know your absolutes (dimensions), you can verify with your CAD and the rest is mechanics.
Good luck.
[:)] finally - something that we can all agree on! LOL
Next big hump - the parents (eep)
after that - money (bigger eep)
Though convincing my parents of the practicality of givine me space will be much harder than getting the funds for at the very least the main and a few TOs to get started with. The TT, Roundhouse, other structures, a majority of the track, rolling stock, and more locos will be gotten over time… Christmas presents for a long time for me 
As for the benchwork, I’m thinking of “boxes” made of 1x2’s to support 2" foam and then 2x2 legs with carriage bolts & T nuts (or something) in the bottom to level it - height will be figured out later, although I’m thinking just about 48-54". That should be high enough (and yet still low enough) to be comfortable. Also, this will allow me to put some bookshelves or something under the layout to either store my extra cars, or for stuff my parents want to put there… maybe it’ll convince them that I’m not stealing space…maybe.
Thanks for all the help guys. Maybe I’ll have a few photos of the layout up for the WPF thread this weekend… if not… then at least the loco I’m gonna be working on…
You know, I am really sorry to rain on this parade, but I think you may be headed for trouble with this design. In my opinion, what makes model railroads fun to operate is the purposeful movement of cars. In this case, from interchange to industries and back. The real railroads will do this with as straightforward a track design as possible. While you have been getting good advice about fixing some of the problems with specific areas of trackwork, I think the movement of cars from one location to another is unnecessarily complex in this layout. This makes the overall flow and function of the layout a bit problematic. It seems one could do better (in terms of fun) in 18 linear feet.
If you look at the movement of cars from the interchange tracks to the various industries, there are a lot of switchback moves required. This can become pretty tiresome after a while. Real railroads also often provide switching leads long enough to do most of the switching in one chunk, rather than “nibbling” a couple of cars at a time and dragging them back and forth all over the landscape before going back to repeat the process.
Many successful shelf layouts are built around the idea of combining a runaround, a yard, some interchange, and industry tracks. Even though an organized, easy flowing design looks simple compared to a nest of tricky switchbacks, it is usually a lot more rewarding to run.
At its simplest, this can be very compact. I designed a 1X6 foot (plus a skoche for the car float) N scale layout for Model Railroad Planning 2005. A central runaround is flanked and overlapped by industry and interchange tracks.
Here’s an example closer to your available space. Something like this design, also based on a real-life railroad, could probably be adapted to fit in your space by bending around the corner
[
Those are some good comments, Bryon
However, it looks like I’m going to be completely revising the “current” plan before I even get started. I talked to my parents tonight, and, while they said they’l have to talk further about it they sounded OK about it - just not in the room that I had thought was available/unused (wow, things change when you’re gone for a few months)
As such, I will not find out where I can put my layout until this weekend. I am hoping to still be able to get at least one 8’ x 2’ section, although the other section may need to be only 4’ long to fit the available space. (bah)
With this in mind, looks like I’m going to have to revise my Givens & Druthers.
Druthers:
Scale - HO
Era - Transition(ish) (1935 - 1945 or so)
Locale/Railroad Co. - fictional/PRR
Roundhouse& a Turntable
Mostly switching
Givens:
Not much space (depends on what I can commandeer now)
Small-radii curves hopefully a min radius of 20" though
I offered some of the following suggestions in another persons thread, but allow me to make some suggesstions. As far as the trackplan, the others are doing a fine job of directing you; I’ll leave that to them. I want to approach the subject of benchwork. You might get more layout from your parents if you can work together to provide usable space under the layout. I don’t know what carpentry skills are held by members of your family, but think of the possibilities that might come to light if you suggested to your mother that she could have bookshelves or an entertainment center as benchwork for your layout. Enclosed cupboards are another alternative. Working with those who are within your household can increase the benefits to all who are concerned. If you do not have many HO scale items; I might suggest also that you investigate N scale. You get much more in a smaller space, and quality and selection have also increased significantly over the past few years.
I agree 100%. This is a very wise suggestion. If you are not so rigid in your approach to the negotiations with your folks, and give every indication that you want to make this work with their input and preferences, especially if you present a couple of good options for them to consider, it will be hard for them to turn you down flat. At the very least, they may have a counter offer. If you can get a decent plan into what they offer, they’re in…and so are you.[;)]
Guess I wan’t clear enough in my previous post… lol
My parent’s were OK to the layout idea - just not in the room I had (wrongly) assumed was unused. So, back to the drawing board to fit this into the space that they say is OK to use. They did like the idea of bookshelves/cabinets under the layout…
Carpentry skills - I think that we’re OK there, I’ve built some small things before on my own, and I’ve helped my dad with remodeling projects around the house. Now electrical skills OTOH…
As for scale - N is nice, although I prefer the size of HO. I have had both scales, so I have a small (trainset) collection of N and HO (somewhere). I also prefer HO because of the availability of kits - which will give me something to do while I’m not able to get home to work on the layout itself.
Maybe I can get my dad involved in this too…kinda reversed to the norm though… LOL
Well, I got an OK from my parents! [:)]
I have to wait until after they get the windows replaced though - but they said that wil happen before Thanksgiving (or at least that’s when they hope to get them replaced by)
So, now I have an L shape that is 7’ x 2’ on one leg and either 10’ x 2’ or 11’ x 2’ on the other (I measured it for 10’, completely forgetting about the extra foot that i’d cut off of the 7’ side - [oops]). So, if the support for the I-Beam isn’t in the way I get the extra foot. I think that I’m going to keep the design pretty mych the same as the above pictures, but put the roundhouse/engine facilities on the long leg, so I have more room for things. I kind of wish I could have added some more tables to this design so as to add more things to do. maybe my parent’s will let me add another 10’ section to the other end of the 7’ one- so as to create a U shape for the layout… probaly not going to happen though.
Well, back to the drawing board to rework the layout
I was wondering how things were going for you. Good luck and keep us posted.