Newbie … wanted to start with a small layout which would help me learn all the basic, allow minor operation and end up as a type of diorama / display case for structures, locos, etc.
Base would be 1x4 piece of 2" blue foam with a 1" piece topping that, cut out at the left front for the lower elevation. Track would be glued directly to the foam.
Grid on plan is 6 inches between lines.
Would appreciate any suggestions which would make the final effort more usable and more appealing.
Well, you can certainly learn a thing or two with that… The one question that really jumps at me though is why did you go with a 3% grade?? In 2.5 feet or so that’s going to look like a motercycle ramp. If you want something that’s a little more operation (running and switching trains) do a search here on Timesaver… Requires a couple more feet in length (IIRC) but it’ll achieve your goal (I think)…
G&D- Looks like you have a good basic switchback plan, and it should provide lots of back and forth running.
Is 1x4 as big as you can make it? Jeff’s suggestion about the Timesaver is a good one, and there is a website dedicated to micro layouts, Micro Small Layouts For Model Railroads is how it’s listed in my favorites. You might get some more ideas from there to add more operating possibilities to your design.
I think You will find that a 1x4 HO layout will be too small unless You are running very short loco’s and very short rolling stock.Such as European wagon’s.And then You would be pretty tight. If possible try to expand like others have said maybe to a Timesaver layout.Thats what I have.Mine is 2’x7’ which I wish I had made it 2’x8’ that extra foot would have been nice.Most people that have timsavers don’t scenic them,However I am in the process as when I build My permanent layout I’ll add it in somewhere.I’m working on the buildings a little at a time,and the landscape too.Here’s a picture taken a few month’s ago.This photo show’s the whole layout.
Switches take up more linear space than you have left for them on your plan, and don’t diverge as sharply as you portray them in your plan. You won’t have room to get both a locomotive and a car in the space you have on the end of the tracks behind the switches.
A 3% grade means you drop 1" of altitude for each 33" of run–assuming no transition. The problem is that you don’t just kink your rails to the approriate angle, the rails bend down gradually–even if it’s only a couple of inches. The other problem is that it means the track at the end of this length will also be at a 3% grade, and any cars you spot there will roll off the end of the layout.
Get some pieces of snap-track and some switches. Do some playing around with the switches and track to get a feel for how they actually go together, and how much space they take up.
Second suggestion: Take a look at www.carendt.us for some ideas on how to do lots of cool stuff in 1x4 feet. Guaranteed inspiration for anyone modeling in a small space.
If you go to the Atlas.com website, you will find a free program for designing track layout called “Right Track”. It is pretty easy and will let you see all the available snap track components. Using that will give you a much better idea of what will fit.
I will also put a plug in for Carl Arendt’s wonderful site “Micro Layouts for Model Railroad” http://www.carendt.us/
He has a section on timesavers or “tymesavers” as he calls them.
One thing you might include in the next draft is the actual width of the track, accounting for the space that cars will take up. With no curves you can park tracks pretty close, but HO scale tracks outside of a yard will be about two inches apart, leaving very, very little room for anything in between the tracks. Your “station” will probably end up being little more than a platform, 3 or 4 feet wide. That’s okay if your intent is to just have a platform, and for a “team track” next to the tracks for the unloading of goods, but there isn’t really enough room for a building.
I also note that you have a “tunnel” apparently dug into a very thin fin of hillside. While it is apparent that you are trying to use forced perspective to make the layout appear bigger, a railroad normally wouldn’t tunnel through such a space, especially if they did a cut right next of it: they’d make the cut bigger and run both tracks through it. I’d recommend another approach: instead of a tunnel on the right side of the layout, consider a large structure that the track runs into. Considering the mountain theme, I’d suggest a large mine structure (like a stamp mill.) This not only allows you to hide the end of tracks, it would give your layout a purpose: the local switcher leaves the enginehouse and moves cars from the mainline into the structure for loading/unloading via the switchback. It also solves the problem of a relative lack of room between the tracks for buildings by placing a building over the tracks and running trains inside.
