When I look at plans and layouts, one of the first things I notice is track elevation as a whole. I have seen some layouts that are all on one level, but all of the track is interconnected in one way or another. There is usually a reversing loop as well. These tend to have a little more of a classic toy train look to them, but offer more room for scenery.
Other types are basic loops (maybe a spur or two), but built on completely isolated layers. These seem to allow for more basic operation and controlling (not as many switches because the tracks don’t connect), and simultaneous running of multiple trains using multiple transformers. Probably good for kids.
Some are two or more layers with inclines connecting them. These are what I was initially drawn to. The inclines might be “earth”, or might be separate incline pillars, or some other structure.
When I look at CTTs toy train layout plans, I see examples of all of the above, and I also see that some offer advantages over the other, depending on what you want to do with your layout.
Coming into the hobby blind and inexperienced, I didn’t really know what I wanted, but I did skip out on the “one level” layout design. I wanted to get as much track action as I could in a confined space, so I went for the spaghetti route. I’m now wanting to open the layout up a little, but still keep plenty of action. I’m interested in what made you decide on your basic track layout.
Here is a crude graphic of what I’m trying to ask. The plans are basically the same, but offer different features because of the track level.
Space. Being only 4’x7’ I could only do so much. I wanted sidings for switching, and an area for a passenger station, so I could run 2-trains.
All I wanted to do was bring a train into a distribution siding, pull the engine out, and bring a switcher in to parcel out the stock cars to their local sidings. Work a few accessories, and reassemble the train for the loco to pick-up. That was my session.
I find myself enjoying a simple bit of round-d-round in the background as I work on other things.
I went with two levels with a grade between them to maximize mainline and minimum radius. the only way I could get O42 minimum radius on the ends of my folded dogbone was to stack them partly on top of one another. The result is a mainline about 80’ long with flowing curves (GarGraves) in less than 6’ x 17’ of space–which I am delighted with–at the cost of a fairly steep ruling grade–which I am not but will live with (my only real problem is an engine wihtout Magnetraction or traction tires).
Thanks guys. 6x17’ is a large space! I started with 4’ x 13’, which was a folded dogbone design. I’m just trying out new things to see what works for me and my son. Basic is better for him, and I like switches and track! So many options out there. I learn something every time you guys post a picture of your layout.
Thanks again!
Wes
Neat musings, Wes. I like to watch the trains move up and down as they run over the uneven tops - more a series of gradations than big-time elevation changes. It gives me the excuse to ‘throttle-jockey’ a bit too.
I like a little of both. I don’t need multiple layers, but I do like to see an incline once in a while, even if it is small.
I’m still fighting with 10x9 room, trying to figure out what to do, mainly because I like long running lines, with inclines, but still want room for a second train or some sidings.
Wes…I have 2 levels. The upper level has 2 reverse loops. It also has the bridges that span the lower level. It also has 6 switches. Two for the passing siding and 4 for the reverse loops. The lower level has 2 separate loops. The outer one has no switches. It is a continuous loop that is shaped in an " L ". The inner, lower loop, is also shaped in an " L ". It has the sidings and operating accessories. There are no inclines or grades. The loops are not attached. There are 6 switches on the lower, inner loop. I run totally conventional. I have 7 insulated blocks that I can park a train and run another.
If I may make a suggestion, Wes, I like the last graphic of yours. You can have multiple levels and put a bridge on the upper level. You could even run a siding under the upper level. Just a thought.
Your layout is a great one as well. 2 layers with no inclines. Everything you own can probably run on it since you do not have inclines, and you get the thrill of watching trains pass over one another on that great blue bridge of yours. I have collected some pictures of your layout for ideas. Like others have said, with that outer loop, you have the ability to have a train running while you play with the accessories on the inside loops, or other layer. I think you have a much larger benchwork than I have to work with through.
I prefer/enjoy layered layouts with inclines so that’s what I started out to do, but mine ended up without any inclines because of 1) space, 2) train characteristics, and 3) accessories. My layout consists of two layers with three independent loops with no switches. It needed to fit in a 5 x 9 area so curve size was dictated by this space. My prewar roster routinely failed on switches, so I kept it simple and dropped switches from my design. Also, several of my engines cannot pull more than 1 car up an incline greater than a 2% grade so my two layers had to be independent (that is, no inclines connecting the two). Finally, I wanted accessories to be a large part of my layout, so that greatly influenced my track design. So, I got my multiple layers, but had to settle for a simpler design to fit my space and meet my most important goals of running my prewar roster trouble-free and incorporating my accessories into the layout.
Your layout was the first layout that I classified as “standard gauge” before I realized how big the phyical track of standard really was. I found your layout right after I saw my first standard gauge layout, and I started to understand what timplate was all about. Everything seems simpler in standard gauge (in a good way). Your’s is a modified version of that with that second level. Right after I saw your layout, I duplicated it with rr track. Great layout, and I don’t think it took you 2 years to get the landscaping figured out like it would if you had the inclines and rolling hills.
You have prewar accessories, and multiple layers, but it still has a dated look to it. It reminds me of really old layouts, and that’s what I love about it. The retaining walls are made of big timbers with lots of clearance. Very toy like, which is awesome. Watching
Wes: When I was into HO, I had a mountain and tunnels, three dead-end sidings, a holding siding, four loops, blocks and individual cab control. One of the loops rose up into the mountain and proceeded down the back into a tunnel exiting on the lower level. I used Atlas NS track. Those were the “good old days” but it was more like operating a railroad than playing with the trains.
Now, I’m 100% ‘O27’ tubular. I “play” with the trains.
My present layout is a single level, namely because of the lack of space and the fact that I am using the same basic benchwork that supported the old HO layout.
I tried to set up an ‘over and under’ trestle system but the inclines and short run space did not exactly work. For a short time, I had a plateau (flat mountain) over part of the layout with short loop. The lower trains were running under it like in a long tunnel.
Presently, I have three independent one level loops. The outer loop is O27-27, the middle loop is O27-54 and the inner loop is O27-42. The outer loop has the sidings for the ‘milk platform’ and the ‘log’ & ‘coal’ dump bins. It also has one of those old Marx metal tunnels.
I have traditional signals, gates and an auto gateman guy. I’ve also placed a couple of old metal hand-operated Marx signals along the runs.
The center has a mountain and a couple of buildings. These allow the trains to sort-of disappear disguising the fact that they are really just running around in a circle.
It is a “play with” layout.
Well, to answer your initial query…The main choice of levels, for me, was limited space. All the best!
Like you, I was pretty new to the hobby when I started this. As a result, I wanted a relatively small layout so that finishing it would not be a gargantuan task. Upon completion, I would then be able to decide what I liked/didn’t like and decide how to proceed from there. I just wanted to make sure that I didn’t bite off more than I could chew. I ended up with a single level at 6’ x 9’. While the track is on a single level, I did make sure that I incorporated several hills and one body of water so that the layout would have some vertical depth.
Thanks for the added replies everyone. It seems that people are enjoying their separate loops, as long as they get some accessories in there somewhere. I have been spoiled by my MTH engines because they have speed control and great climbing and pulling ability. I do have a couple of conventional engines that do not do as well on inclines, and get very fast quickly. Those do much better on a separate loop. I don’t have any operating accessories yet, mainly because I don’t really know how I want to add them to the layout in a logical manner. Some of you guys are very good at building a layout with a purpose. I think that only comes with experience.
This comes at a good time because I think I’m moving. I went and looked at a couple of basements, I mean houses, today. It becomes even more important because it will be time to redesign yet once again. This thread has turned out to be pretty good…
With all of the bad news floating around regarding the economy and real estate. The one good thing is that we are in a buyer’s market. Good luck finding the basement house of your dreams.
Wes,
I like everything everyone has said. I like watching my trains run, and I like switching things around in the yards, and transitioning them from track to track, but most of all I just like watcing them run.
If you do go with multiple levels and grades, make sure not to over load the engines. I put all my engines through the test of pulling 20 cars up my transition grade and not many of them can pull that many, most max out at 14, but all can pull 10 with no problem. The only ones I don’t do this with are the Postwar engines. They will only be run on the main level… I know they could probably pull the grade, but I don’t want to run the risk of messing the up. Eventually I would like to get all my modern engines upgraded to either TMCC or DCS. Since the majority of my command control engines are TMCC, the conventional engines will most likely be upgraded to TMCC, but we’ll see.
I don’t have any postwar engines besides a single Marx train from my dad. All of the MTH trains really pull well, but I do make sure that wheelspin is non-existant. Speed control helps so much when climbing grades, both up and down.
It’s a buyer’s market. I just went through a house that was supposed to be very nice, but for only being 4 years old, it was pretty rough. I think they are going to have a very hard time selling. If I can get it at a significant savings, then it would be a great investment. It’s bank owned now. It already needs new carpet, and much of the woodwork will need to be replaced. It looks like a dog got very bored, and needed a chew toy. It does have some structural things to offer though. 3 car garage, sun room, and room behind that 3 car garage to build a workshop. It needs all new flooring and still has factory paint on the walls. It’s a perfect flip house if the market would respond to it. I’ll low ball them and see what they say.