I am building an HO layout - my first in over 30 years!!! Here is a draft of the layout. It consists of a low track at bench level which is a point to point that is hidden under two mountains in the top left and right corners, and a high track that hugs the sides of the mountains and has a high bridge duckunder. Any feedback or comments are appreciated. It is planned to be 1970’s Quebec outside of Quebec City.
The only suggestion at first glance is too ensure you allow access to the inside of the tunnels in the case of a derailment by either being able to remove the mountains from out front or get access from underneath the layout in the corners for both your arms and head.
Thanks - I was planning to leave the mountains open from underneath for access. It will be tight but I think it will work if needed.
Figure is hard to grasp, and may lack a lot of sidings and spurs, but if I take it at apparent face value (and if I don’t misunderstand your figure and description totally), your only possible operations for this layout seems to be to let one train circle endlessly around and around an elevated loop, while the other train leaves the end of the line, run down a single line to the endpoint, which may or may not have a single ended siding next to the mainline, and then backs up again back down the same line to get back to the place it started from.
Mmm - guess it says “town” in one corner. So you might have a depot on the mainline where the go-forth-and-back-up-again line can stop to pick up and drop off passengers.
Is this layout intended as a fully automated display layout where your main focus is on building the landscape and structures, rather than on running trains?
Stein
I hope to do both - train operation and landscape and building. Ideally I am looking for a balance between allowing a continuous loop and train operation switching. I’m not unhappy with the elevated loop, but the low track as you point out does not allow for much in the way of operation. Any ideas on how to improve that? I have space at the right that could be used for sidings or spurs perhaps - I could expand that area to approx 30-40 sq ft - moving the control bench elsewhere. This is the kind of feedback I need. It’s easy to change on paper - not so easy once I start.
Aralai,
I hope you don´t mind me voicing bluntly my concern over your layout. IMHO, your track plan is just too simple and unrealistic to give you some kind of a satisfaction operating it once you are getting close to finishing it. Building it will be fun and you will learn a lot while doing it. Your layout is doomed to be torn down, because you will get bored after a very short time.
Before you start, do a lot of reading. Kalmbach offers a lot of beginner´s books, that will help you to get the right idea. There are many web sites offering good advice and finally, don´t hesitate to post your questions here - the community will be glad to help you. I have seen that steinjr already gave you an answer - he is a wizard when it comes to trackplanning and a fountain of information. You can´t make a mistake learning from him… [:)]
From your track plan idea I see that you have plenty of room available.
Here is just an idea, what can be done. The HOG is a well designed beginner´s layout, developed by Scott Perry (IIRC). It already combines quite a lot of what you would like to see in your layout.
While I of course appreciate that people speaks well about me, I do not want anyone to think that I think of myself as a wizard track planner, let alone a wizard layout designer.
People like Byron Henderson (and Lance Mindheim and quite a few others) are the true master layout designers who turns out layout plans that both works functionally, and at the same time are pieces of art that also conveys the look and feel of the era and location modeled.
I am but an apprentice track planner who can draw up a reasonably functional track plan for small scenes and layouts, and can do (and present) research reasonably fast. But I do not have the artistic flair of those guys when it comes to creating truly great looking layout and scenery plans.
But enough about that.
I totally agree with Ulrich that a Heart of Georgia style layout is (IMO) a pretty good starting point for a layout plan for someone wanting a H0 scale layout with both continuous run, possibilities for creating cool looking scenes where the track passes just once through each scene (instead of first passing a the same spot twice, first going left on the foreground, then going right in the background), and with plenty of switching action.
That is - if a duckunder or liftout to get into the core operating pit is not a big problem e.g. for medical reasons.
Industries and scenery can of course be changed to something else, if you want to give the layout a Quebec flavor instead of a Georgia flavor. A backdrop can be mounted along the outside edge of the layout (it is operated from inside the pit), so mountain scenery is not out of the picture.
&n
You know what? It is very difficult to provide comments on a plan unless one is aware of the planner’s objectives and details on the available space. So, I’m not going to try to comment.
Mark
Great comments! Thanks! I agree that the layout as is would get boring fast. I guess I am having trouble noving my mindset from a loop to a point-to-point layout that actually allows more complicated train operation - which is definitely one of my bigger objectives. From your feedback, the biggest issues seems to be sidings, spurs and crossovers to allow a realistic operation. I will go back to the drawing board today and see what I can come up with. This is one of the fun parts - planning…Any specifics on components that allow for realistic operation? Ex: single line siding, passing track, etc…
Here is my standard answer to the question “what should I model” (copied and pasted from a previous reply - some details may not be applicable to your situation 
[quote user=“steinjr”]
FWIW, here is my approach to this.
You need to ask yourself three questions, and the first two questions should not be skipped:
A surprisingly large number of people fail to consider why they want a layout, or just go “because it is cool, duh!” and leave it at that.
Don’t skip this step.
No one but you can define why you want a layout and what you expect/hope to get from your layout.
Think about what you hope to get from your layout, and write it down.
For three reasons:
a) there is no “one size fits all” when it comes to how to design two layouts for two widely different purposes.
A layout designed to support you playing dispatcher at a CTC will often be quite different from a layout built mainly to give you a place to show off and take pictures of your detailed model trains, or a layout which can run in continuous display with various animated effects to entertain young grandchildren, or a layout built to al
In addition to what stein posted, two books would be good to read through to assist in your planning journey. My preferred reading order would be:
Track Planning for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong
Realistic Model Railroad Operation by Tony Koester
Since you are interested in Quebec City, it would be good to do some research on the railroads that run/ ran in that area. To see modern trackage, I’ve found the aerial maps at Bing and Google to be good search tools. Just zoom in on Quebec City and scroll around the tracks to find interesting scenes. Even abandoned railroad grades can still be found and traced - some going back to the 1920s and 30s and maybe older. This can give you some town names to start your research with.
Thanks again for your feedback! It is very helpful. I’ll make a point of answering the questions steinjr posted so I know myself exactly what I want. Of the top of my head, I see the layout as an ongoing project where I will continually either improve details or tear down and rebuild in some cases, although that would be scenery more than tracks. Once I have the tracks in place, I intend to leave them so I want to get them right. I am familiar with Quebec, having grown up in Montreal in the 1970’s, hence my interest in modeling 1970’s Quebec. I also have exisiting locos and rolling stock as well as scenery from that location/era. Last time I built a layout was 30 years ago, starting with a 4 x 8 sheet which progressed to three 4 x 8 sheets, and the layout was based on Charny, St.Nicolas, QC area on the south shore across the St.Lawrence river from Quebec City. Charny is/was a big CN town, and has a great railway yard (Joffre Yard) with the only extant full-circle type roundhouse in Canada built in 1880. While part of me wants to recreate that area, I realize that the scale would make it difficult to reproduce properly, however I’d like to incorporate elements - the LDE’s you talk about, so I might have an LDE that represents a part of the Joffre Yard, and other LDE’s from areas around Charny. I’d love to tackle two projects - building the Joffre Roundhouse and the Quebec Railway Bridge. I know they would be big projects, but they would be awesome elements. I guess a lot of modelers DO take real places and adapt them to their layout due to scale. Just taking a google map of the area and trying to reproduce exactly is not going to work, but grabbing 3 or 4 LDE’s and incorporating them might work. So right now my big question is: Do I attempt to reproduce some real elements or just create my layout from my imagination? My preference is leaning to recreating some real elements - the roundhouse, bridge and perhaps a key industrial area.
Got em both today! Thanks. Found an amazing Model Railway Store - I have a feeling I am going to be there a lot. Good bunch there that seem like they know a lot about Model Railroading.
OK - redid the layout. Not sure that the length of the sidings in the yard are long enough - I may have to move the yard. The track that runs along the top is hidden as it inclines from the top right to top left. Again - comments are welcomed. Still fine-tuning things…
ETA: Yeah don’t pay too much attention to the detail of the tracks in the yard. I need to fix them to allow assembly of trains.
No. The latest version is a head-knocking access nightmare. You’ll hate it. It reminds me of those carnival amusement games where you score points by walloping fake gophers that pop out of holes in a table. Do you have those up north?
It sounds like you are very much interested in learning more and more about theme,operation, and design. That is an enjoyable process in itself that you’ll likely continue to do. The last thing you want to do is to build something permanent now, only to find yourself six months later much more knowledgeable but stuck with something unsuitable and encased in foam or hydrocal.
Your space suits itself to a design like the HOG, so your final benchwork will likely be very similar to it. You said you want to get it right first off. That’s tough to do, really. You could start by building some simple table benchwork like the HOG and put a yard LDE in the top side and some spurs along the other sides, hook up two wires and start running trains. Its easy to rearrange and add/delete track, spurs, sidings, and even yards when the track is not affixed to the benchwork. Three months later, after you’ve accumulated more knowledge and experience, you’ll be in a better position to crystalize your theme, plan, and permanent design.
You may think a simple doughnut plan looks boring on paper, but check out pictures of stein’s layout (linked somewhere in this forum) and you may be more inspired.
Just my opinion.
Doug
Fair comments. Yes we have those gopher games Let me try a HOG type layout… It’s fun to keep designing.
… indeed it is! Take your time to do it - don´t rush yourself. After all you will be investing quite a bit of money and time in your layout.
Here is another example of a small donut-shaped layout. It is steinjr´s layout (hope you don´t mind me posting this here, stein) - earlier version, though .
Just as food for thought… [:)]
This is not necessarily a super layout plan, and it very obviously is not super structure modeling, but at least it illustrates that you can fit in quite nice sidings even on a smallish (6.5 x 11.5 foot) around-the-operator (and in my case around-the-walls) layout. Version of plan illustrated in photos below (version 44):
Some pictures from how some scenes-in-progress looked before tear-down:
Municipal Barge Terminal (was on the lower wall before):
3 pictures from the 5x2 foot milling district scene (along right hand wall, from chimney towards door):
A view down along the elevator for the mill (by the chimney base in upper right hand corner):
And here is a couple of examples of what a great modeler (in this case forum poster Dr Wayne) can do with an around-the-wall style layout in a bigger room, with a combination of city, industry, small town and countryside modelling (even based in Canada
Photo tour of his layout: http://www.the-gauge.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=1107
Grin,
Stein
These posts are very helpful for me, and as a visual person, the photos help even more.
Questions for steinjr - I don’t see any way for you to turn your trains to face the other direction - do you just run different ones different ways? Also, your loop that passes the door - how did you handle it? How high is your layout? It seems deceptively simple, but maybe that’s part of my problem right now when designing - making it too complex.