Pretty close Gandydancer19
-
Do you have open space/aisle space to the right of the rightmost peninsula?
-
Access in he top part of the middle peninsula is going to be a little challenging - but if there is just scenery here, maybe not a problem.
-
Use run-through staging - accessed from opposite ends of the layout, as in Paulās sketch, instead of having one track āfrom stagingā and one track āto stagingā going down next to each other.
The way you draw staging, you either have to have a big turnaround curve in staging, or have to single ended sets of staging tracks, where you have to back trains out onto the main layout to restage them by hand for your next session
It also looks a heck of a lot more convincing when trains come from somewhere, pass through your layout and then depart for somewhere else, and the somewhere else isnāt 2" away from where the train came from in the first place.
Stein
-
There is aisle space to the right of the right most penn.
-
Scenery only with the 2nd deck above.
-
I do like Paulās way better, I will change it and loose the dbl. line
I think its starting to look like a RR
I have to agree that this has moved a long way from the opening post on page 1.
Looking good!
Rich
Hey Guys,
Hope you had a Good Holiday!!!
I had to re-think because my measurements were off by the stairs.
So I had time to look around in the basement and have cleared out some room for a helix. I will tunnel thru the corner wall and put the helix in the next room and might even place a small staging yard in there as well. I think I have more room for operations and the helix makes it easier to get to additional decks. I am thinking the train comes in the lower corner around the room and back to the lower penn. then back to the helix thru a 2nd tunnel.
I am still looking for some feedback on what is correct and wrong with what I have.
This attempt makes it easier for the yard and engine service area with room for a decent size town/city and then off to the 2nd deck. The 2nd deck will have logging and mining operations.
I might give up on having hidden staging as I can āparkā on the long yard.
On the left of the bottom door I thought there might be enough room for a shipping port? I am not sure on how much room is needed
I had some time today trying to find a better way and came up with this
The 18ā long yard concerns me because running 18ā long trains will make this large space for a layout seam small.
Have you thought about something like this:
It is a little rough because all i did was take your plan two post above and cut the city out and lengthen the peninsula in paint.
Keep working it and you will find a design that works.
Chris
For whatever it may be worth, the best idea so far is still this sketch by Paulus:
It has:
a good walk-along flow for the main deck,
room for 6-7 visually separated scenes along the main,
sensible reaches and aisles,
good approaches to to a staging deck under the main deck along upper wall,
good approach from junction on the left peninsula via a helix to logging branch on a higher deck
room for branch line on upper deck along left and top wall - perhaps also around right peninsula.
And it can be built and operated in phases. It is a good way to fit a layout into the room.
Your own latest attempt does not work as well:
Some challenges with this (in my opinion - other people may feel otherwise):
-
no staging - the runaround loop at right will have the same train run both right and then left through the same yard scene in short order, making it look less sincere - you donāt get a feeling of trains coming from somewhere else and departing for somewhere else
-
fewer distinct scenes, seems unbalanced - huge yard, little run
-
reach issues for the track cutting across the base of the peninsula at lower left
-
Very wide peninsula at lower left, which will take a lot of time and money to fill up with city scenery, adding relatively little to the railroading experience.
Then again, there is the āIt is my layout and I will do as I likeā factor. It is your layout. You make the decisons. But in my opinion, you could do a lot worse than take the basic concept Paulus sketched and use that to crreate your own scenes and personality for your railroad.
Smile,
Stein
I can only second SteinĀ“s statement!
I have been following this thread with great interest, but I cannot help having the feeling, that the OP tries to āsqueezeā in as much ātrains and trackā into the given space (which I think is huge!) instead of working from a layout concept. I can only recommend to re-visit the givens & druthers and trim down the concept.
Less is more!
Yes, can only agree with Ulrich, "Less is Best", but would hazard a guess that it is a concept that most of us have difficulty accepting, myself included!!!
All the best,
Cheers, The Bear.
hi gentlemen
since Southernās layout is a bit smaller then he thought first, the most western peninsula becomes rather short. But the new found place for the helix could do double duty. Not only to get trains up to a second level, also to get trains down to a staging level if needed. If Southern wants to use his yard for switching he had better park his other trains out of the way.
Anyway, the other peninsula can now be elongated (drawn in red) and so avoiding the reach-in problems as on Southernās roundhouse blob .
The differences between the one blob plan and the two blob plan are obvious:
- more scenes on the two blob plan but shorter trains.
2)larger radii (27" and up) are possible on the one-blob plan.
Of course in stead of undergroud staging the solution built by Bob Smaus is an option (having both lines side by side like a junction) , just as building a high line on a viaduct above and along the top-side of the plan.
Have fun
Paul
Well, I took all of your ideas and tried to ācondenseā it a bit, and keep everything within reach.
I agree the 18ā yard is a bit to much[*-)]
After some more research I will have the hidden staging coming from the helix to the top right, thru the layout to the helix up to the 2nd deck where there will be the mining and logging areas. When it comes out of the helix on the 2nd deck there will be a helper service, or could place it on the first deck before the helix??
As for the helix,
Staging at 32", middle deck at 44", top deck 60"
If my math is correct it would be,
12" rise at a 36" radius would require 3.5 turns at 1.7% grade with a 4" seperation between decks.
16" rise at a 36" radius would require 4.5 turns at 1.7% grade with a 4" separation between decks.
Does this sound good for deck heights?
I have seen people talk about keeping separation at something larger than 1.5ā between decks. But this depends on deck height and will be a personnel preference.
There was another thread on height difference:
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/t/201296.aspx
Do you have a bookcase with adjustable shelves? It would be the best way to mock up the different heights. Keep in mind that decks have a thickness to them between 4" and 6" to have room for benchwork lighting and switch machines.
Chris
Here is a link of a study done for heights on multi decks that i am going to base my heights on.
28" for staging, 36" for 1st deck and 56" for the top deck.
http://sluggyjunx.com/rr/georgetown_branch/layout/layout_height_study1.pdf
hi southern
some alternatives,
I always start with indicating the kind of scenery.
just my view, not necessarely yours
Paul
I went with Paulās idea with a change or 2.
I am pretty happy and excited on how it is starting to come together, THANKS for all the input.
I will use the yard as a place to hook up the helper service for the run to the 2nd deck.
I placed the roundhouse on the back side so it would be easier to reach and still gives me room for the 2-4 tracks to the coaling bunker.
I like the place for the shipping port and added a ice platform nearby. I will have to look for more info on the port when it comes time.
Added a passing siding around the blob before it goes over a long trestle.
Now I need to start the 2nd deck. 
This is just a 1st draft.
You keep making your peninsulas wide and aisles narrow, and you keep placing tracks pretty far from the aisle. You also seemingly waste the bump-out of the wall at upper left, and make the bench work too deep at lower left.
If you look at the way Paul draws peninsulas (and shelves), they are narrower, so you donāt get reach issues, and so you wider aisles. He also uses vertical view blocks instead of distance to separate the scenes on opposite sides of the peninsula.
Instead of trying to maximize layout surface area, try to mentally place yourself next to the track, looking along the track, instead of mentally placing yourself in a helicopter looking down on the landscape.
We are all used to looking down long and narrow corridors - it doesnāt much bother our brains to look down along a strip of landscape say 15-18" wide in H0 scale (i.e. corresponding to 110-130 feet wide) and maybe 10 feet or so (corresponding to about 1/6th of a mile) deep.
Another potential trick to take down the width of the peninsula with the turn back curve is to hid the outside end of the curve with a Belinadrop (a backdrop hiding just the outside of a turn back curve - named for the late Jerry Belina).
It tends to discourage people from standing at the end looking at the end curves - makes for better scenic separation between the two sides of the peninsula, and means that you often can have sharper curves - since sharper curves looked at from the inside looks less bad than sharper curves looked at from the outside.
What is your longest rolling stock - what is it that determines the kind of curves you need, and the size of your helix?
Smile,
Stein
I am trying to keep at least a 28" radius for the 4-8-4 steamers that I have. They donāt like to run on less than 24".
I did a mock up today and it requires at least a 3 x 3 area for the 15" t-table and 6 stall Roundhouse, Then about 6ā of track for the coaling bunker and switches.
As for the helix, a larger radius will ease the grade so I went with the biggest radius possible but can trim it down once I get more info/testing done.
With a 36" bench height it isnāt difficult to reach 36".