Hi,
maybe I have spend to much time playing with my track planner, but in the attempft of designing my dream layout, i get lost in the jungle of alternatives.
Is there anybody to say go for this one:
or for that one:
Help?
Personally, I like “feel” of the first one.
I can sit and imagine operations as more interesting than the second (but that’s my personal asthetics).
and the drop-in section would be sturdier by being shorter & a straight shot.
Although, since you have a sloped ceiling in the back, I think the more you can put out in the middle, the better.
Depends if operating standing up means a bent neck with the bent ceiling.
Hmmm…
Not takining to consideration your ceiling…
I kinda agreed with FunkMonkey. Had the same thought about the above. Operations would be maybe a bit more fun as you have it more spread out among the layout. Also, seems you would have a better yard to work with and storage of cars during your sessions.
All though I do like both the plans. Well designed.
I think that it’s great that you’re trying to design your own layout. It’s a hard task to start and finish successfully.
I think your efforts may be hampered by the fact that you are jumping around in your plans so much, and changing “too much” each time. When you make a change, ask yourself how this change benefits your railroad and what it adds.
Hmmm - I really like your adaptation of my own layout track plan in the top plan, especially what you did scenically with the upper right hand corner - the road and the track on the backside of the grain company - I might steal that idea right back from you.
But I think the big blob peninsula on the lower part of the plan looks more interesting in your lowermost plan.
How about combining the top from the uppermost plan and the bottom from the lowermost plan ?
Smile,
Stein
I really liked the plan that GraniteRailroader had modified in your thread “Furnishing a Train Room”, (but I’d add a crossover between the main and the siding just left of the depot). After that, I like the top option presented in this thread.
Greg
… I guess I will just try that - will take a little while, but it will be posted here for discussion.
Making up my mind is so difficult - just because the room is not the ideal place for a layout. Have to talk to “SWMBO” to get approval to sell the house and buy a new one with a big room for my trains…[:)]
… so here it is!
How´s this one?
At first glance, there seems to be a lot of operating potential in this layout but I would be curious to hear what you think would be the primary mode of operation. I would guess you like switching so presumably your operating sequence goes something like this:
- A train arrives at the upper station.
- A switcher comes to break up the train
- Switcher distributes cars to various industries
So - how exactly would an operating session go?
This is pretty much what I had in mind - plus the occasional railfan trip to give my steamers a go.
The theme is a branchline operation somewhere in the dry area of the US, serving a considerable amount of small industries along its way.
The only serious flaw I see in the plan is that you only give a nod to staging. With all the “work” you can do on the layout, without the ability to ship products away from your layout, you are handcuffed. At the very least. I would take the upper left portion of the layout and turn that area into as dense a staging space as I could. Then your products can come from Chicago, Los Angeles or Houston and be sorted a Clinton for delivery to your industries.
I would agree w/ Spacemouse on some staging. One way to incorporate a lower level staging is to allow the mainline to run outboard of the peninsula, stating at the duck under/ swing away near the dood. The decending track need not actuall be cut into the benchwork, but decend on an outboard ramp to the area underneath at the rear wall. This wouldn’t affect the overall plan so far and still allow full access under the layout. The benchwork may have to be narrowed about 3" is clearances are very tight to the left side of the layout. There is enough run to decend and gain the clearance nec. to do this.
It seems that you would have about 8 1/2’ to 9’ before needing to run under the benchwork. Minor changes to the 1x arrangment or some clearance notching may help to lessen the grade to 2.75 or 3%.
The narrowed isle @ the peninsula is about 18", the peninsula end need not be squared off but extended to gain added run for the decent. I doubt you wand a decending track on any lift out or swing away. This is possible, but could cause rail alignment issues.
This grade isn’t ideal, but your not talking about long trains stored in that length of staging.
Just a thought…
… thanks, guys, for your recommendation - I agrre that some sort of proper staging is required, not only to “store” trains, but also give them a destination to head for.
At a later stage, there will be an addition to the layout, providing that staging area - I need SWMBO´s approval for that (already took me year of persuasion plus some clear carbon stuff to come that far…[8D]