What are your feelings about point-to-point railroading versus continuous loop operation?
Ralph,
First of all - [#welcome]
I prefer continous loop. If I want the train to run unattended, I can. If I do operations, then I do not care about the loop, but at least I have it.
I have purchased or subscribed to MR magazine for nearly 40 years. Many layout builders, even those heavily focused on prototypical operation, either have some reverse loops or connectors for continuous running or wi***hey had one.
Regards,
Roy
Roy,
Thank you for your input. I’ve built several continuous loop layouts but never a point-to-point system. I am most interested in prototypical operation and thought point-to-point might better facilitate that. However, your point about having the option of leaving the train to run continuously is well taken.
Again, thank you
Ralph
As much as I wanted my layout to follow the prototype, I have made a provision for the main line to secretly loop back on itself. Very sneaky, because one end is in a hidden yard, and the other end has a switch coming from behind the backdrop, and will be covered by a highway overpass. The train will simply go into a tunnel, and pop out in a different place, bypassing almost 200 feet of mainline.
I like loops for the same reasons Roger and Big Boy indicated - it can run by itself when I want it to do so.
I’d do a point to point if I had the room.
There was a thread or two on the OGR forum recently about setting u O gauge layouts outdoors. Doing so would give you a very long run, by O scale train standards, depending on the size of your backyard. That could certainly be set up point to point, if you wanted to.
I have 1/3 acre, and I haven’t measured anything, but the thought of setting up a garden railroad has occurred to me. I was gonna do it with G scale trains, but maybe I’ll stick with O. I have to measure everything out, too.
If I did this, I’d probably still have it be a continous loop.
Tony
I like to operate like the pritotype.,but the continues loop is there. You just have to let that baby srectch it’s legs once in a while.
Although I don’t have one there may be some avantages to a point to point.
One would be that it could be put into a narrow space.
Only 10 to 12" wide with a passing siding.
With a few relays you could run two small trains simultaneously.
You could also add industry for more switching fun!
I think this type of layout would be ideal for a home office or back of garage were the front end of a car can fit under.
I like having continuous loops so that I can just let my trains run and watch them go without having to touch the controls. Switching isn’t really my thing.
Mitch, I think I told you when you visited, things change as you get older. Switching isn’t your thing, YET. Just wait, at your age it wasn’t my thing either.[swg]
as far as I can tell, my layout is the only point-to-point toy train layout that ever existed. You can tell that I’m into switching and track puzzles.
Loops are easy and conveinent and I use them for most trains. However, I also use point to point for trolleys and RDC’s. I use DZ station stops with these. I wi***hey or someone would come up with a component that would not only run the point to point with station stops but also run switches so that as 1 train pulls out another can pull in on the other side of the station. That would be great with the new subway sets by MTH and allow us to run a lot more trains at the same time on the same loop or point to point set-up.
docflhs
Unless your layout is built in a blimp hanger, you don’t have enough room for a prototypical point-to-point layout. In O, 110 feet equals One Mile. A (generous) 20’ point-to-point layout equals a Whopping 960 real feet of track. 960 feet of track is enough to store a train made up of a steam loco, 18 small boxcars, and a caboose–a fairly short prototypical train. Unless you are modeling the industrial trackage on a single, SMALL business’ property which only shunts around a car or two, a loop is no less prototypical than point-to-point.
I’ve got a quick takedown device I have invented to change point to point to continuous, made of PVC. I’ll share the plans w/you at a later date.
Mine is not an “either - or” answer to this. I prefer both and have that on my HO “Can-Am” railroad. The overall dimensions are 35 ft in length and 15 1/2 ft wide at the widest point - most widths vary down to 7 ft or so. The layout features a double track mainline - a rather large passenger terminal with 8 covered train platforms (all filled, of course!) and a mountain point-to-point line for my RDC’s to make their journey. There really isn’t anything fancy or novel with the way I’ve constructed this - perhaps the exception being that the RDC’s come to a stop on their own when they enter their respective sidings at either end of the run. Toggle switches and insulated rail joiners work for me.
So, I run two trains in opposite directions on the main level - usually one VIA Rail and one Amtrak. The mountain run features BC Rail RDC-3’s or VIA Rail RDC-2’s (2 per consist).
I should point out that my passenger terminal and city area is set aside from the mainlines - kind of like an addition to a house; an add-on if you will.
So with three trains running, I then can run some trains in my passenger yard - make up or beak up, while “things are happening” on the main lines.
You know what? I spend just as much time simply looking at the layout with all of the divergent aspects built into it as I do operating the trains. The way this turned out gives the viewer so many different vantage points in my walk-around layout arrangment. You really cannot see it all from one place - for the mountains do a good job of concealing what is right around the corner or on the other side.
That’s my contribution!
You need lots of room and must like slow train operation for point to point. You can have both. Put loops at the end of your points to give continuous point to point.
Charlie