If somebody just wants to run stuff in a circle, fine. Have at it.
But that’s not what most people who ask for help with a trackplan say they want.
Dave H.
Yeah, we are missing something. Two somethings, to be exact:
- Timetables before track plan.
- A book of beginner track plans that have a reasonable, logical, sample timetable to allow us to understand why the track plans are good ones.
I could not begin to start planning my “dream layout” until I could understand this:
Limitations on a model railroad are what keep a good one from becoming insanely complex (and they probably should not ever look like a plate of spaghetti).
Yard too small at one point? Sorry, this railroad does not own the adjacent property, and so operating is going to be ugly and difficult when an extra is thrown at you at five pm just as the flyer is trying to get out and the yard is full of the end of the day interchange. That local due to leave in an hour may have to be cancelled, sent the wrong way to the first available siding and stay out of the way until things quiet down. That dang facing point industry track a mile away now comes in handy so I have a place to get Baldy’s 4-4-0 out of the way, since he won’t be using it until morning. We’ll send a hostler to bunk with the fireman in a caboose until we can bring her in and get her ready.
In real life, the railroads were planned around an assumed time table, and adjusted out of financial necessity thereafter. I assume, but cannot find, that sidings were originally placed with such issues as “the down grade eastbound will not be needing water at Y on his way to X, but the opposing westbound and climbing passenger will have to stop for water at these points, X, Y, and Z. Therefore, the timetable which was created with the geography known, not only dictates where the pax and freight meet, but even where Y is
Unless we have all the other people who a rr have, it a slag of a lot easier to figure out how best things run befroe builing a timetable. Been trying to figure one in head to kill time. They can be useful, but it as a neccecary piec for us new guys? not close.
QED
If a question is asked about a track “plan” than it can be assured that a “plan” is what that person wants. A simple concept about the purpose, scope and operation of a model railroad is sufficient to make a track plan feasible.
Otherwise, if there is no intent towards operations, orderly train traffic, or specific prototype practices, if all the person asking wants to do is run trains through a scene, then a track plan becomes redundant because ANY arrangement of track will suffice.
It is right that we direct a newcomer into what may eventually lead to a fully miniature rail transportation system by giving them honest and accurate guidance. This hobby is called model railroading, not toy train collecting, for a reason. Take the newcomer, welcome them, answer their questions with accurate information, then support whatever they choose to do with that information.
Even a simple circle of track is a far more interesting and imaginative place to showcase your train if that said train is running the circle with a theme or a purpose. Later, maybe that circle will grow a siding, perhaps a branch line, perhaps not, either way that toy train is now functioning (at least conceptually) as a model railroad.
Well then, I’ve said my peace.
No? Not even close? Really? We’ll, I’ll be. Then, I must be wrong.
My mistake must have been in believing that most new guys probabvly do not have other people who have railroads to help them figure it out, and that trying to do it in one’s head without understanding how real roads devloped, would have made it so.
Your right, I am sure. My bad. Must have just been my own experience. After all, what people wanting critiques really want to hear is where the styrofoam mountain looks best once the Christmas Tree has been removed.
Crews
Don’t take it like that, as I don’t mean it that way. But I myslef have tried to think about a timetable. And I;'ve been in a new group trying to set up ops, which should have a timetable (we tend to end up in the same place.) But a new modeler has enough on their plate trying to set up the rest of the above before figuring that train L should try to leave at 3:47. It’s not a problem to set up the layout, practice moving cars, and if desired, scrub the personal intrest ops (I wanna swap the boxcar at the warehouse with a new one, it’s been emptyed by now) to a timetable design once it;s up.
As to the sarcastic remark about the Christmas Tree, there’s a fair bit of those as well.
Didn’t think about timetables when I was 5. Don’t think about them now. Won’t think about them in the future. I’ve been in this hobby for over 35 years and I still think it’s kind of bizarre for one guy to sit in a closet and talk to guys 20’ away over a headset. Just never got into the whole timetable/dispatcher aspect of the hobby.(but that’s just me)
It’s perfectly possible to operate in a prototypical manner without a dispatcher, a timetable, track warrants… Plenty of short lines and industrial switching districts made do with a single locomotive. I’m sure that the closest thing to timetable operation at the car float served freight houses in Da Bronx was having things ready to switch the float when it arrived.
For that matter, doesn’t the UP run all freights as extras?
To be successful, a track plan has to allow the kind of operation the owner wants - even if that is to run in a circle (which is also prototypical, if the circle is big enough) or to simply shuttle a single streetcar back and forth. Still, before the plan can satisfy the owner’s wants, the owner has to figure out just what is wanted.
I will not say that it’s impossible to simply slap some track on a sheet of plywood and run trains. I will say that it would be a good idea to allow for frequent (and possibly drastic) changes in the track pattern.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - TTTO, 24/30)
Don’t need to worry about timetables for a beginner. Just getting the concept of “here” and “someplace else” is a big enough leap.
The other critical part is understanding that you have to bake the operation into the plan. My son’s layout is operated almost exclusively as a roundy-roundy layout. That’s the way he likes it. But it has all the parts that it couldhave a more organized operation at any time.
The other concept that is really hard for people to grasp is “scale” (and I don’t mean HO vs N). That is what you can accomplish in a certain space. The modelers drive the hobby towards HUGE engines and LONG trains with LONG cars. Search the archives and how many beginners are wondering how to put their 4-8-8-8-8-8-4 around 18 in radius curves with a 50 car train on a 4x8 layout in HO.
Dave H.
Teh Ops club could use timetables to help spread us out. for the 50 feet long of space, for 4 of us or more to cram into one 30" walkway is rediculous. Beyond that and keeping Passenger trains in service, then I can’t find much use either.
loathar,
Are you a lone wolfer? If so, I can understand your opinion (or at least how you’ve come to hold it). But let me tell you about my club. See, just last week, I had 18 operators. I was the dispatcher, and we had half a dozen mainline engineers, plus yard crews, local freights, brakemen, etc.
Without a dispatcher and a timetable, there would be utter chaos. The dispatcher plays traffic cop, while the timetable provides the framework. We run some 30 trains in a two hour span…and our layout is only about 1/3rd built. A dispatcher and a timeable is necessary to keep the accidents to a minimum and keep the wheels rolling.
Paul A. Cutler III
Weather Or No Go New Haven
I see there is a lot of talk of the 4X8 layout here. My first project was a 4X8 layout. You can get alot of railroad in a 4X8. I built it to expand off of it. I enjoyed every minute of construction. I planned everything down what I was going to run to the industry I wanted to have. DCC everyone rave’s about, I’m old school DC cab control its worked for me for years and with all the equipment I have meaning rolling stock its kind of cost en-effected now. This hobby is soppose to be fun and thats my[2c].
Here ya go
Thanks for all the reply’s and comments folks. Now I don’t think it’s just me. I guess the two town thing isn’t that important after all. Trying to get the new modeler to decide on some purpose for why their RR exists may be the key to the whole thing.
Umm… Isn’t the thing we’re really missing is that over time our interests change. And we can’t predict when we start where our interests will be next year, or 2 years from now, or 5 or 10?
So either we get preoccupied with trying to design the ultimately perfect dream-come-true lifetime layout (which often results in analysis paralysis in which we become so afraid of failure we never start building), or we just start building something without having a clue what it is that we really want (what kind of railroad do Tiggers like best?).
So who has more fun? Well I couldn’t tell you that. Infinitie planning cycles can be a lot of fun for certain people. And for others seeing that the 4x8 sheet of plywood layout isn’t what was really wanted can be disheartening.
What we are missing is that there is no such thing as a lifetime/dream layout. There’s only the layout you’re planning or working on now. This means that often times there will be layouts built that will get dismantled so another one can be built. But with each succesive layout the builder will know more of what they want and how to get there.
Better to make a bunch of (so called) mistakes with a smaller layout early in the life cycle of a railroad modeler than make those mistakes with a bigger layout.
And instead having the attitude its up to us enlightened modelers to teach the newbies what they need to know, wouldn’t it be more effective to SHOW them what it is that interests us? Blessed is the newbie with a couple of experienced modelers nearby who will share what they’re doing with him (or her).
FWIW
Charlie Comstock
ps. Loathar, is the DS talking on a radio to crews 20’ away any less realistic than being able to see from one town to another when those towns would usually be 10 miles apart? Or that our steam engines actually run on electricity? Or that our water is made of plastic? If you haven’t tried ops on a layout where the ops have been refi
Charlie-The whole OPs thing just isn’t my cup of tea. Not trying to “dis” anyone that likes that sort of thing. I personally don’t see the fun in packing my stuff up to drive an hour across town to a club and wait in line for someone to “allow” me to run my trains.
This is one of the reasons I quit my brief stint in slot cars once the track got crowded and the owner started getting picky about what kind of cars you could and couldn’t run and when you could run them.[2c]
I’d rather spend the effort to make my layout look real, (like yours!) than worry about prototypical OPs. (I’d feel REAL silly wearing a headset to run my trains…[:I][:D])
This is exactly the type of sentiment I was alluding to in my earlier rambling, pain induced post [:D] You have no interest in OPs just as I did (didn’t?) while today it drives everything I do. And we probably both enjoy the hobby just as much as the next person. Jamie
I’ve always felt that the best place to start is to look at the prototype. If you don’t have a lot of space, then find a prototype scene that doesn’t take up a lot of space. Perhaps a small village with a freight house, a small industry, maybe a grain elevator and a coal pier. This simple, rural scene, can provide for a fair amount of interesting operations. Maybe the coal comes in from the west, the grain cars might be empties coming from the east, or loads from the west, depending on the season. The freight house can get stuff from anywhere. Maybe it’s an REA stop, and an express car would be there to be picked up by a passenger train.
Even if you don’t know how the actual prototype scene was switched, you can create an operation scenario based on your track plan. Or, maybe your interest will be piqued by this small scene, and you’ll take some time to study what the prototype actually did to serve this village, then base your track plan on that.
That’s basically how my layout evolved, and continues to evolve. The more I learn about my prototype, the more I have an understanding of what I need to simulate its operations on my layout. At this point in my “career” I can hardly imagine having a layout that lacked a yard to support the break down and make up of trains.
And while I generally agree that Engine Terminals can be space consuming and under-utilized, I found that my operations require a sizeable one. I run westbound time freights out of staging, and at the yard, power is changed out for the remainder of the trip west, likewise for eastbounds, which stop for fresh horses before heading back into the staging yard. I also have a fairly sizeable fleet, which I do like to display, but I also have to call on many of the locomotives during an ops session.
All that being said, I also think it’s important for someone seeking to dip their toes in to go ahead and build somethin
It must also be remembered that a newbie question that has been asked 10,000 times here is the first time for them!
Yes, there is a search function, they may not know it, they may not know how to use it, they may forget it’s there (I do), they may not know what key word to type in.
They are simply looking for information. And nothing is more important to them than having it answered. They don’t deserve to be stomped on.
I had trains as a kid, and teen (o/o27 & N). I recently got back into the hobby some 30 odd years later. This time I wanted the HO I always wanted. I had no idea what a DCC was. My DC wiring knowledge practically non-existant. I am not good at electronics, I can fry something electronic like an egg!! I have very tight small space restrictions.
I need RTR DCC stuff now that I decided to go DCC. Not everybody can scratch build a loco from tincans, bale wire, telephone cord and taperecorder motor and duct tape!! Computer programming my locos? my layout? Out. I’ve worked my small layout by trial and error. Mostly error, lol. I still haven’t figured out how to use the Atlas freebie trackplanner. Not a clue…and I don’t dare ask here…because of some of the responses I may get from someone here who works as a computer programmer by day, and an electronics troubleshooter on weekends and
Well said, Galaxy.
I think the biggest problem about trying to offer ANY advice to a newcomer is that we can’t have the rapid-fire one-on-one conversation that would give us a picture of that person’s dream world. Typed question/response, wait for answer, someone chimes in with something that may be helpful, totally irrelevant or downright insulting. If there have been six or a dozen answers before the original poster gets back, his inclination might be to go hide under a rock (or take up origami.)
Any time someone is venturing into a new area they are hesitant, sensitive and woefully ignorant. Helpful, friendly, informative comment will bring them in and begin to raise them up. Harsh or abrupt answers will send them fleeing into the night.
My point? When answering a newcomer’s queries, be helpful and gentle. If that’s impossible, just back off and go to another thread.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)