New Layout Design Contest? -- Open for Discussion.

Model Railroader Layouts and layout building
1

Well guys, it was suggested that we hold another contest. Let’s throw it open and talk about what we want to do this time.

For those of you who don’t know what I am talking about, here are some example of layout design contests we have done in the past.

http://www.chipengelmann.com/Trains/Layouts.html

Basically what we do is post our entries. (You email me the .jpg and I put it on a web page.) We invite the members here to vote, and whoever gets the most votes wins bragging rights–which doesn’t really mean a lot because most of the designs are great and it is a matter of who hits on something that fires the most rockets.

So you want to do it again. If so, what do you want to design?

2

I wonder if we could try a slightly different tack this time. Apart from deriving a workable, fun, involving track plan and the accompanying revenue generation and its structures and streets, etc, how about a limit to the materials. For example, there were space limits, or space configuration limits imposed on all entries in at least one of those earlier contests. We could still do that, but what if, all up, the layout had to be erected out of three sheets of 5/8 or 3/4" ply.

What I am suggesting is that we present a more detailed plan that onlookers might actually snap their fingers at and say to themselves, “Hey, that works for me…I can do this.” So, with three sheets of ply, you have to create a working framework with supporting and bracing elements, including legs and joists/cross-members, and then supply a track plan that makes good use of the space configured by the arrangement each of us decides to apply to the layout.

It’s a thought…

-Crandell

3

We did do a sheet of plywood contest, where you got to use a sheet of ply as the surface. But what you are considering is using it for legs, benchwork, etc. Hmmm.

4

How about a 10’x10’ L shape contest? There are many of us out there that are limited on room space but would like a decent railroad. I know there are a lot of good layout designers on this board and think by making it specific size and shape all designers will start from the same place.

5

We’ve done a 10x12 room and a 2x8 shelf. Is a 10 x 10 “L-shape” 24 inches wide what you are wanting?

6

The 10’ X 10’ “L” shaped results were not show in your previous post…

Glenn, in Tulsa

7

How about “L shaped shelf layout with each wing no longer than 10 feet long out from the corner, max 24” deep along shelves, max 30" deep in corner, any scale you like, any theme or subject you like"?

Smile,
Stein

8

Looks like we have 2 votes for a 10 x 10 L-shape.

9

Make that three again, Chip!

10

Guess I’ll lop off the third and fourth walls of my layout, plus the alcove area, and submit that. [:D]

–Randy

11

since there’s been a 3rd vote, count me as the fourth. And prepare to laugh at my entry, but hey, to improve one has to be challenged eh?

12

So the two wings of the “L” are 10 feet long and the with is limited to 24".

Are we talking a specific scale Z, N, HO, S or O? The multi-scale contests don’t get enough entries and are too hard to judge.

Any more restricting requirements or theme. I personally like the more limited scope.

13

10x10 L-shape, 24 inch depth sounds good to me.

14

Why not leave the scale open?

I think, it´d be a good idea to show, what can be done in different scale, given the same space!

15

I’d like to see something in the 18 x 20 foot range, in HO. Maybe next time around.

16

How about a layout based on a real railroad?

Enjoy

Paul

17

I think on the 10’x10’ “L” layout the scale should be left open. It gives people who dabble in both scales a chance to show their stuff.

18

How about something geared towards the beginer? You know the kid who just got his trainset for Xmas but want something a bit more sophiticated than an oval but still simple to build. I’mok with the 10x10 L shape and open on scale but here’s the catch: use of unmodified sectional track. The basics of a train set oval HO for example; 12 pc of 18radius curves and 4 9" straights, add maybe 10 more 9" straights plus some special tracks like turnouts and crossings maybe 4 pieces, mixem any way you want. N or O scale would have different track packs to work with.

I know books have been written about layouts like this but it would be interesting to see what John Q public would do.

19

Okay, I’m going to call the debate on the size closed. The contest will be a 10’ by 10’ L-shaped shelf layout, not more than 24" wide. No track can be more that 30" from the shelf edge.

Now, still open for discussion is scale

This is a common discussion and one that gets the most people’s dander up. Here are the main points.

Choosing a single scale (say HO)

Every one has the same parameters.

There are more people competing against each other.

People who don’t normally work in that scale at a disadvantage.

Allowing designer to choose his/her scale

People can work in their chosen scale.

Smaller scales can fit more track in the same space.

Since it is not fair to have HO compete against N, judging has to be separate.

By breaking up the scales, you greatly diminish the field in each scale. A typical contest might end up having 4 entries in N, 4 in HO, 1 in O and one in G. Obviously the O and G get best in their scale. First second and third place in either HO or N are devalued so to speak.

Using John Armstrong’s concept of “squares” to level the field.

Each scale has the same number of squares to work with. The size of the square is relative to the scale.

Always brought up, always opposed by the people who want to model the smaller scales. They say it misses the point. We’ve never done it.

Comments?

20

What about removable cassettes? Better clarify and specify the dimensions or some may view that as cheating the space limitation.