Are there any opinions on point-to-point versus continuous loop layouts?
That depends on what kind of model railroading interests you. If you like to watch trains roll and roll and roll through your nice scenery, of course you may lean towward something continuous. If you like a prototypical ending terminal situation, with lots of realistic switching, go for point to point. That’s the beauty of the hobby. You’re the boss! If you use end loops, and wire in DC and not DCC, you’ll have to do some reverse loop wiring and toggle flipping, too. You probably know that, Ralph. Anyway, it’s all a matter of your personal railroadin’ style. Just have fun!
continuous running is best if you have non railroader visitors or children visiting. Some plans give u the option of both. Personally I like the ability to run a train cont. as well as work the yard or local as well.
You could do something really different & have both!
I have planned two identical staging yards to tack onto my existing 9x12 continuous loop.
They’re going to be built into a bookshelf with switches coming off the same section of mainline within 5 feet of each other.
This way I have my continuoous loop with point to point operations.
Gordon
I like to have a double track continuous with lots of switching in the middle, i let one train run the loop and play with the other, etc
I like shelf layouts, so point-to-point is my personal preference. Eventually my layout might make it all the way around the room, but I’m in no hurry to get there.
Go with both or a loop. Unless you’re a gung-ho operations type AND have a long mainline (3 or more scale miles), you’ll get bored going back & forth on a short stretch of track. Having the option of a continuous loop allows you to run the layout when no one else is around, and watching a train go around in circles is a great stress reliever after a long day’s work.
I’m amazed by the modelers who go through the time, expense and effort to build a gigantic layout, who then only have it powered up for operating sessions, and who then don’t even run trains on their own layouts! What’s the point?
That proverbial nemesis: “if you have enough room!” There are more challenges (operational) with a very long “point to point” mainline. There is more running “freedom” with a “roundy-roundy.” I like “timetable passenger operations” plus way freight “tight schedules.” This enables “hot shot” or “express” runs from locations along the mainline while heeding the constraints of a time table between “priority” runs. Both P. to P. and continuous offers maximum fun in my opinion. I’m not a NASCAR or Indy fan, so “continuous” without “operation” would soon become boring for yours truly. It is all a matter of personal preference, so make yourself happy.
I’m partial to the point-to point, branchline operation after, all how many SP branchlines went in a loop?
It is normally easy to put in some sort of continuous running connection into a point to point layout. I would recommend trying to include one, just to watch the trains go by.
Dave H.
I really agree. I think that it’s nice to have some continuous running (less people taken to operate, and more fun to relax and watch without working), but also a few switching yards add more visual interest and allow for some escape from “THE LOOP” that most of us got into model railroads with. Having both keeps you from getting bored with either one. Additionally, I might add, I always feel nervous about crashing the trains in the yard (sort of a phobia [:(], even thought it is unlikely to be happening frequently) so the continuous loop relieves that. If you have visitors unfamiliar with the complexities of running a yard, not only would it make me more nervous, but it wouldn’t be fun for them, so you should have some continuous running. I currently don’t have a layout, but I am planning one, which may never get as far as I want to complete the continuous running, and limit the yard space. So I hit upon the idea of having a short turn-back just after the storage yard, which would be after the switching yard. In the end your preference is really what it comes down to… Good luck on your railroad. [:)]
Both would be the best. I have a 9x16 N Scale layout with a double track mainline. It has five towns along the line with two sepaerate short runs to dead end lines. If I’m in the mood to just watch trains I can set up two mainline trains and let them run. My personal preference is point to point with lots of switching. I recently purchased a computer software program called “Shipit”. this program prefers point to point to run properly. Just as bruce22 & thefox have stated, it is your own preference that counts but relax and just enjoy no matter what you choose.
I model “Rock Mountain Railroad” N Scale
So many people on here say how “unrealistic a continuous loop is” - I beg to differ; there was in MR (don’t remember which issue offhand anymore) an article on what I remember was a BN themed layout, and basically it made the point that to look at the route maps of any major carrier, there will be many “loops” (or what could be construed as loops) in its trackplan. Granted, on my CP layout a loop isn’t practical (you can’t just turn a corner in Vancouver and end up back in Montreal or Toronto), but those are the cases where a point to point really IS necessary for prototypical ops (if that’s what you want). In any case, do things YOUR way - that’s what our hobby is really all about.
I run both, when our club meets at my layout, we run strictly point to point. I have 3 turn tables, one at each end of my mainline for locomotive turn around and to turn combination cars for their return trip across the layout, and one at the end of my branchline to turn locomotives that run unit coal trains. During the Lone star regional convention last year my layout was on the tour and it was convienent to let a couple of trains run continuously while I visited with guest. My two end points are tied together with a partially hidden mainline. Since I run all steam, the turn tables are a necessity.
Jerry Turner Operator of the standard gauge Florence and Cripple Creek Ralroad. Check out the web site, florenceandcripplecreek.com
Hey Ralph, seems like you need to have both. I build the first stage of my new layout with continuous run through staging yards. That way I can hold one train in the yards but bring out another, giving the illusion of time passing before I bring back the first train. It’s also really handy when the grandson - or visitors - want to run a train. Just let 'em run 'em 'round.
It also means that I have something finished at this stage while I continue with the next stages of my layout - which will be the point end of loop to point.
Have fun - it is a hobby. Whatever you want to do is your decision and your choice!
I’ve got twelve feet of shelf, one foot deep–no way to put a loop in that. And somehow it manages to stay fun even though I have only twelve feet of mainline. It’s long enough where I can put my head down at track level and watch the train go by, then hit the brakes and do some switching.
You can have the best of both worlds even in the simplest of layouts - an oval with 2 spurs on opposite sides, and a diagonal divider, as shown in several suggested designs in MR track plan supplements. You would be surprised at the switching opportunities possible with just 1 loco, 6 cars and a caboose. , and a few simple rules. The oval is used to simulate time and distance between spurs A & B, and to run round your train to switch the spur. Trains must move clockwise from A to B, and anticlockwise from B to A. At the start and end of your operating session, the oval on one end, at the divider, becomes an interchange. If you do this on both sides of the divider - hey presto ! you have a bridging railroad. To simulate a more realistic operation, your main run could be a folded dogbone ., with a reversing loop added at one end, and a wye at the other, both inside the dogbone. The ends can then be used as passing / run round loops. If you run both sides of the dogbone close together- abracadabra ! you have a double main line. OK, this is all fairly simple stuff, but you will be surprised at the complexity of the switching moves that become possible, with just a few spurs.
I have the best of both worlds. A point to point with a hidden return loop that goes through the staging area. This way it can be operated like a point to point. Still I can show it off to my non-train freinds by letting a train loop along the track.
Jetrock writes: “I’ve got twelve feet of shelf, one foot deep–no way to put a loop in that. And somehow it manages to stay fun even though I have only twelve feet of mainline. It’s long enough where I can put my head down at track level and watch the train go by, then hit the brakes and do some switching.”
Beg to differ. I’m in same boat (25’ long shelf) and am designing some portable, easy-to-take down turnaround loops, mounted on PVC frame that can be folded up so they don’t block the hallway.
Actually, I just combined an older continuous loop with a separate yard. The loop has a reverse cut-off, so I can run from the yard, run continuously as long as I want, the take the reverse cut-off and return (eventually) to the yard. And the yard can be worked separately while the train is running the main “loop”.
Good luck with your plan!