So a new house is coming much sooner than I expected, and will have a lot of room to build a new layout. I’m aiming for a dual track loop with some interchange tracks, a team track, and an couple industries. When we get settled in I’ll start thinking more on that aspect, but I’m here for some pre-planning advice.
What I’m here for though, is some advice if my idea I have for the layout would be plausible. I want it to be realistic, even if it isn’t based on anything.
What I’m wanting to do is “own” my own shortline company.
One of the few things I cant decide is which rail line I’d want. So what I was thinking was the shortline would just lease the locomotives from the 3 I would like to do. Pennsylvania, Milwaukee, and C&O. I figure this way I could have all 3, and could even split the lines with loco manufacturers, like C&O would be the EMD locos, and Pennsylvania would be Alco, something like that.
Another thing I’d want to do is have a Steam Engine. The idea behind this though isn’t freight but passengers, andnit would just be a tourist line. I have some really nice long Santa Fe passenger cars. I was thinking I could do (or have done) some watching to them, and make it look like the letters were blacked out (but still a little visible, as the paint over would have worn down, and It wouldnt really matter what line the cars were from. As for the steam loco, I would either do the same, or since I want to but one anyways, I’d just see if I can find one that isn’t line marked.
My plan for the table is to have it on casters so it can be pulled out from the wall when needed.
I’m not dedicated to that layout either. I would like one that I could leave up against the wall, and maybe an L shape too. I’m still looking for designs. But at least having thre design I have now I have something to compare too, as well as something for others to see and hopefully show me other layout designs that meet what I’m trying to do.
I would prefer a longer yard, and one more spur if possible. I have a 44 ton loco I’ll shi the blacked out lettering and weathered idea too, and have that run the yard.
Right now though I’m really wondering if thre concept I have for the short line is something that could have happened. Something that seems like it would be real.
OK, what seams to be most popular is an around the room type, and for continous running, you’ll need a return loop on each end.
As far as “could this have happened?” Your freelancing, anything is possible.
You’ll have to get people in here that model and have knowledge of the different roads you want to involve, than the “hypothetical” discussions begin, which can usually drag on and on.
I’d just go with it, and skip all of the “what if’s” and build what you want.
If it didn’t really happen anyway, why waste all of the conjecture on “what if it did”.
I know some like to come up with long and detailed back stories on the justifications of their railroads excistence, but for me, that’s just a waste of time.
As far as your track design, just some basics of how you’ll do the continuous running, and having a layout you can reach across, along with staging.
I never considered staging on my small layout, and if I build again, I will.
This layout seem large for pulling out from a wall. Also how smooth/level is the floor?
You might want to check the idea of a “DOGBONE” of “FOLDED DOGBONE” along two or three walls, as this gives a loop at each end for continous running and more layout space for floor space used.
I dont really know how big the room is right off hand. We looked at it a week ago. And I didnt remember to bring a tape to measure the wall or anything. We still haven’t truly decided where things are going either.
I know I cant do an around the room style, as the room this is all planned in will have some other things in it, like my computer, and probably a couch. The house has 2 living rooms, so the one with hardwood floors will have the train layout. I do know that an L shape would fit in the one corner, so that could free up and create some space too.
I would prefer a smaller layout for sure, just not sure how to do that. I do want the 22 inch curves, and a dual track line for when I step up for DCC.
For spurs if I can have 4 inside the layout, 2 on the outside, and a small yard, I’d be happy. One of the inside spurs though I would like to cross over the inside track and lead into the outside with the 22" curves so I can run the steam on that one. I have some Santa Fe passenger cars that I’ll be using for the tourist steam train, and they can roll around 18" curves, but they are a tad long. Most of my freight cars would be shorter and should handle the 18s fine.
If anyone has an idea of a layout like this, I’d be grateful to get the info on it.
I’ve also been thinking once we do get in, measuring up the area and getting set up with a paid layout design service.
EDIT: I was looking through the trsckplan database and found one that caught my eye, so I purchased an e-copy of the issue, March 2016.
The layout is from the “Hauling coal on the PENN CENTRAL” article. It is a 4x8 that I think could work for what I want to do. It’s also a 4x8 layout. I would just need to figure out what I’d have to buy to build it with code 100 though as I have an abundance of that. I kinda wish there was a bit more of a br
A realistic freelance railroad is more like the old Midland Road,V&O,Utah Belt, Maumee Route and other famous freelance railroad. My C&HV is realistic as is my SSRy,HR, and SCR. A back story is needed for layout details. One wouldn’t call his railroad “Appalician Western” and have Florida type scenery. Now should the name be Appalician Southern and he models (say) the Jacksonville District then that Florida scenery would work.
Believability and pause is what makes a freelance railroad believable.
A collection of locomotives from various railroads does not make a freelance or even protolance railroad.
What’s wrong with that style of modeling?
Absolutely nothing but,like(say) the term “expert modeler” “freelance” is used to freely to discribe a layout.
Point well taken Larry. I wasn’t knocking the process, sorry if it sounded that way.
I actually did come up with a back story on my shortline, for me. I never got into the details and writing a long essay for others to read about it, for their “approval”, or input as far as “Is this plauseable, or could this have happened?”
In my world, it happened. [swg]
I understand where those that do, are coming from. Always good to have some reassaunce that your idea is workable.
As I mentioned to the OP, others that model and have knowledge of the roads he wants to include, will have to chime in and give input, so he (the OP) can justify, in his own mind, what he wants to model.
To me the East coast roads are complicated, with so many overlapping areas, so I won’t add any input as to “could this road and that road done this or that with another road”, because I don’t have any real knowledge of any of them.
I grew up in, and have lived in the upper midwest all my life.
So I was able to get over to the house today, but of course I forgot a tape measure. I sid grab pictures of the 2 places my table could go.
I’ve also been messing around in my track software, and came up with those 4x9.5ft layout. I do believe I can get a 4x8 table, so I’ll just need to add 9 inches on each side. I do believe though it will need work as I’m certain there wasn’t much frame work to keep it from warping and such
So the wall with the window, I think I’ll have the table up against it width wise, so it’ll stick out the 9.5ft. I’ll have to put my computer on that wall too, bit with the 4ft width, I think if the edge is lined up with the right side of the window, that should give me plenty of room.
I’m also thinking instead of the out of scene tracks going on the outside of the loop, I’ll turn it the other way, and have a little peice jutting from the table against the the wall for that.
Track right at the edge of the benchwork creates problems in terms of both derailments and cars being brushed off the edge by viewers and operators. There’s nothing magical about a 4-foot-wide HO layout. Five feet or so in width fits in 99% of the places a 4X8 would fit – and offers broader radii and more flexibility.
Back when I was a beginner and most of us started with 4x8 layouts using the standard and readily available 4x8 sheets of plywood, the lumberyards also sold sheets of plywood billed as ping pong tables and were I think 5x9. It is easier to cut away than to add, and perhaps given your space 5x9, assuming they still sell sheet plywood in that size, would work, even if you cannot use all that wood. It does however mean that the very center of the layout might have access challenges since it stretches the ease of working on tracklaying, wiring and derailments.
And it always warrants repeating that any oval based track plan has its limitations when it comes to operation and retaining interest. Tony Koester in Model Railroad Planning and his Trains of Thought columns regularly advises thinking about having the lumberyard rip that 4x8 into two 2x8s and having an L shaped point to point layout.
Just a comment on your “green” track plan. That is a high desnity of track for the amount of space, and a large number of turnouts. Once you assume that each siding presumably has a structure or two large enough to justify rail service, then you are looking at a sort of semi-urban industrial park density that might or might not be consistent with the desired theme. Your layout will be mostly filled with track and the structures of rail served customers; not much room for homes, stores, or yards and fields. And remember that those structures by the sides of the track can also make uncoupling a challenge - again particularly in the middle of the plan.
Also it is easiest to switch trailing point switches - you just back in to drop the load or pick up the empty. Since our cars and locomotives do not have the “inertia” that the real ones do, and thus we cannot do flying switches, it is necessary to use that run around track on the top of the plan, or the sort-of run around track on the right edge of the plan, for
I am highly considering going to N scale. Since I’d be starting out with nothing, I can jump into DCC. And of course can fit more in a smaller space. If I can find an L shape point to point I can build a loop around to stick in the one corner, I’d be happy.
At least having 1 loop around to let a train just cruise around the table is a must. I was hoping to be able to run a steam train around it, just to watch and listen to.
I’m working on the wife with the scale change. I told her that she has 3 options if she wants to make the room a sitting room/den with my trainer and computer. Either give me the whole room and dont worry about it, buy all the N scale stuff I need to make a layout, or let me put the table sticking into the middle with one of the short sides of the table up against the wall
What is considered maximum reach? My grandma’s layout as a kid was a 4x8 double oval that was stuck against the wall in a corner, for the back side if the loco got stuck, she just pushed it with a pointing stick (a wooden dowel worh a rubber cap on one end, and the other had a rubber cap that had a cone useful for pointing)
With N scale, do you think I could do like a 3.5ft wide L layout in that corner that could loop around on the outside? Would that be too wide?
One thing I’ve been trying to avoid is elevations when I have been doing the layout designing, but I might see about getting some paid help with it. I figure a folded dog bone where there is a section that comes up and over might work. I just wouldnt know how to do the elevation and all that.
I will talk to the wife though about not having a loop. I do want one, but I could forgo it for a full freight operations. I would just need to change a little bit, go a bit earlier for timeline where there might be steam and diesel for locomotive power.
I am thinking to about the 3 lines I want and am leaving towards C&O, so I
