I try to keep at least 3 inches, and preferably 6 between the track center line and layout edge…
- Protect against equipment falling into the abyss.
- Protect equipment from errant elbows.
- Provide some foreground when photographing the layout.
Nick
While I use a 2" minimum from center line in HO for planning purposes, I almost always angle or curve the track near the edge. The track may reach the 2" minimum in one or two places, but most of the time it’s a little more due to the angle or curve. I’d love to use a 4" minimum (Free-mo standard), but with my small space it would crimp minimum radius or layout plan too much.
How you choose to operate and what scenery you use between the track and the edge has a lot to do with how close is too close for the health of your locomotives and rolling stock. Slow speeds, good track work, and scenic features between edge and track are all steps toward minimizing opportunity for floor diving, and will eliminate distance as the sole source of adequate floor diving prevention.
As Nick pointed out, none of my strategies work very well against shirt sleeves and elbows. The best prevention for errant elbows and shirt sleeves seems to be decent aisle width.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Making your layout and equipment literally derailment proof may not be possible but you can come close. Making it visitor proof – or owner klutziness proof – is another thing altogether.
A scenic ridge can save a lot of anguish about tracks too close to the edge, but such ridges are not always practical or scenically realistic.
One classic technique, maybe less used in these days of wonderful looking scale trees made with delicate natural materials, and layout tops made of foam rather than plywood, is to drive in a series of nails, like finishing nails, fairly closely spaced but not in a perfectly straight line, into the board and create trees out of them. It makes a sort of natural fence or barrier in strategic locations. Remember that most railroads do remove vegetation that is too close to the main line so a bit of setback is in order.
Dave Nelson
Thanks everyone for the input.
May resort to clear plastic as I will have track under 3 inches from benchwork/scenery edge (have a 4x4ft sheet picked up ages ago on clearance at Home Depot). If not then using scenery like trees or fences.
I agree good, solid trackwork is essential. This shot is about 6-7" wide and around 51" to " OH NO!". I may eventually plant a few trees along the danger line.
Terry
Doc, if your facia isn’t completed, you could consider extending the facia’s front vertically a half inch to a couple of inches to discourage locos tumbling to the floor and to discourage visitors from leaning on the fore-scenery.>P> If your facia is completed, a “topper” addition is possible using an attractive wooden molding to cover the horizontal seam where the facia strips were joined together.
Thanks, Jim, but the facia is probably as finished as it’s going to get. I’m not too worried about stuff going over the edge - the trackwork is reliable and speeds are low. Operators (usually just me) are required to walk alongside the trains as they traverse that long grade, so even a minor derailment would be spotted quickly. While the “hill” is necessary to get to the second level of the layout, I decided to make its inherent limitations part of the operating scheme, rather than bemoan the fact the the grade is “too steep” (over 2.5% in places) and the curves are too tight and too many. I get to run helpers (either on the headend or as pushers) and the low speeds prolong the operating enjoyment. While I have run trains of over 70 cars up that grade, most are under a dozen cars, limited by the capacity of passing sidings.
Wayne
Very nice scenery. Weathering would help bring the rolling stock up to a similar level of realism.
Hi Wayne, actually I was referring to DOC in CT, the original poster addressing the raised facia idea. I could see how you’d respond to that professional title though, especially considering you had the most recent post and all.
Do people call you Doc as opposed to Dr.? I certainly wouldn’t presume to without asking you. My Mom raised me right. :-
I liked hearing the details of your grade climb as I’m planning on having to do the same. I think having a helper district will be fun and not an imposition on a small layout. If I can do without one that would be ideal but I like prolonged operation too.
Oops! [banghead] The “doctorwayne” moniker is a left-over from work (and probably the only one suitable for this site). It seems that some people thought me a little too particular about details for someone working in a steel mill - oddly enough, I thought them not sufficiently particular. [swg]
I’ll generally answer to any of those choices, including my name. I hope that I wasn’t being presumptuous by using your proper name - it’s in your profile, so I didn’t feel the need to ask. I do agree with you, though, about asking when in doubt - I have several friends also on-line who never use their real names, for whatever reasons. Doc, or Dr. or just Wayne is easier than typing the whole “doctorwayne”: one of the drawbacks, I suppose, of a name with no shortform and “dubya” was already taken. [(-D]
Wayne
Jim’s fine Wayne. I forgot it was in my profile but it’s only my last name I prefer to keep “secret” on the inter-web-thingy.
Personally, I felt taken by “dubya” myself 
My wife- the “rear Admiral” on our boat, will tell you that I “earned” my Capt. moniker by being a little too particular about details too! I am also sometimes known as the Chief Nagravator rather than Navigator.
Gotta go nagravate some stubborn plywood into submission…cheers!
[(-D][(-D][(-D]
“There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”
But somebody did. [swg]
Wayne
This question will give you a different answer every time, but I think that your concept of three to four inches minimum is acceptable. However, I would want to have good track work that would minimize derailments, and keep my speeds down in the prototypical range. Keeping loose baggy clothing away from a layout also helps keep trains from going over the edge accidentally. More space will also give you a better sense of visual reality once an area has scenery.
The worst thing I ever saw was a layout that had mainline track right at the edge with no guard. I have never seen an accident at this persons layout during an operating session, but it has to have happened. Having the track that close doesn’t look good, and has got to be a constant worry for those who operate on it.
Sometimes you have to make sacrifices in order to get the layout you want. [swg]
Sitting on a rolling office chair and following along with a train as it works its way up that grade gives an operator a real sense that the train really is working. And, once I get around to covering-over the interior abyss, it should look pretty decent, too.
Wayne
Wayne,
What will you be using for the flooring for this section of your layout? One of those yoga mats, or something along those lines? (Just in case the worst does happen.)
[(-D][(-D][(-D]
That line currently dead-ends at the top of the hill, but I do run trains up it, and, of course, have to back them down, too. The only mishap that I’ve ever had on this grade occured on the curve just this side of the high bridge shown below - a boxcar derailed, rolling down the embankment to the road below and taking several others with it.
The passing motorist was shaken, but unharmed, [;)] and damage to the freight cars was minimal and easily repaired. Cause of the mishap was attributed a truck attached too tightly to the offending car.
Once the “big hand” removed the damaged cars, they were replaced by others and the train continued its journey to the top of the hill. After then backing all 71 cars down the hill, the four locos continued their journey around the layout with further mishap. (Note that the first car is an empty flatcar.)
I also run short (12 cars) but heavy (100 oz.) coal trains with live loads up and down this hill without mishap, and use both mid-train helpers and pushers too, all using DC control. Speeds are slow, about 20 mph or less, but I’m confident enough in the track and the trains that I’m sticking with the concrete floor. [swg]
I’m not advocating that everyone should build tracks close to the edge of the layout, but I wanted to have a second level for at least part of my layout, and the long climb around the peninsula was my preferred option to get the trains there - keeping the track a
I recall John Armstrong’s layout had track at the top of the grade right on the edge of the benchwork with a rubber fill extending out strictly for scenic purposes. It would compress to allow traffic through the aisle.
I think walkaround control makes it safer because you’re closer to the train and likely to hear a derailment before it leaves the ties, especially at low speeds (Being in O gauge probably doesn’t hurt either. An equal level of track and wheel construction and maintenance yields a much larger margin against derailment with the big stuff.)
Capn - do you have a picture that you could share of that idea of wooden molding covering fascia? I like the idea as my straightaways are from 22" curves on a 4x8’ tabel and get within an inch. [:-^]
Reminds me of when I went to buy a motorcycle helmet. They had $25 helmets and $100 helmets.
I asked the sales guy what the difference was. He ask me if I had $25 brains or $100 brains?
How much you value your equipment will determine how close and under what conditions to want to use.
Hi Jake. No, sorry I’m still completing benchwork and have no pics of anything postable yet. I haven’t set up a photobucket type account yet but will when the track’s all laid.
(I haven’t installed any facia yet, but will likely use a molding to cover the seam when I add my higher elevations.
I’ve seen the “extended” facia with moldings done quite a bit and will try to clarify in case it’ll be able to give you a better idea:>P> Basically a 2nd (higher/top) strip of facia masonite is directly fastened on top of the lower (already installed?) strip of masonite.
There will of course be a resulting horizontal seam running the length of the facia/bench top somewhere between the “original” lower strip and the top strip>P>Of course IF you haven’t cut or installed ANY facia yet, you can simply cut a taller piece (srip) than you might’ve originally planned.
Check out wood moldings (mouldings) at Home Depot, Lumber Yard, Lowes, etc. to find one that you think would look good (not too distracting) with the railroad OR if you’re going for the furniture/cabinet look (doors under the bench,etc.) find one that’ll compliiment the doors/legs, whatever.
Hope the description helps some. Maybe someone here will have pics to share…
If a facia will be “too much” for your 4X8 layout, perhaps you could just add a boulder outline shaped small piece of facia in critical areas to prevent tumbles?
EDIT/ADDITIONAL IDEA:IF your layout is simply sitting on a movable sheet of 4X8 ply perhaps you could buld a “tray” for your layout. Simply place a 5X9 sheet of ply (or similar larger size) under your present layout sheet but build a frame/wall all the way around it lst. This way your 4X8 might be able to drop into the tray and voila-instant facia/tumble blocking fence!