Size, I shoe horned my layout in my area as best as I could and got 9' X 14' around the wall with a 4' x 7' opperating "pit". It's probably a little wide for the room.My layout is above my garage. The pitch of my roof limited me to what I could do. I do have 20 and 21-1/2" main line radii, #10 mainline turnouts with #7 turnouts off mainline. I am still working with my track plans to optimize them.
Without a spare bedroom, I have to make a lot of compromises. My layout is small and fits along one wall of our bedroom. It is about 10ft long and has a width of just 2ft. The shape is of a folded dogbone. That means: sharp curves, short trains, no engines with 3 axle trucks. The inspiration for this layout came from an article in MR about small layouts. I incorporated my scenicked test oval layout into the new, larger layout. The curves on the left side of the layout are hidden under a hill, so that I can stage there at least one train. If I had the complete bedroom for my trains, I would build a long dogbone (or maybe a lineair) layout around 3 walls, with a peninsula in the middle. Well, I will have to wait till the kids move out. That will take at least 10 years. :tb-wink::tb-wacky::tb-biggrin:
My biggest compromise is to run both my German trains and the American trains on the same layout. The first planning was to have two decks, one American and one German, but it soon turned out to be not feasible. Now the American trains are passing a German city scene of the 50s, and the German trains will pass some DPM buildings forming an American Main Street. I build a lot of industry because these are relatively neutral, and I also use industry buildings as scenic parts instead of mountains. The old Heljan brewery will probably one day bear the sign "Stattberg Manufacturing" ("statt Berg" = "instead of a mountain" )
I model NTRAK modules with all the compromises that go with them. I model long multiple module scenes and try to break up the three track main whenever possible but the the tracks all have to come together somewhere to maintain the standards. I try to keep the scenery compression to a minimum to better represent the prototype I am attempting to recreate.
My biggest compromise is Life. I want a layout so bad but it seems like other priorities get in the way. I have a wonderful wife and three awesome kids I would rather sacrifice than to have them sacrifice for any reason. I have recently moved and started a new job. The new house has a nice walk in closet I now have for a layout, just a little bigger than 7' x 11' with a door in the middle of the 7' wall (and no windows). So now I'm working on planning a layout again... Lucas
Many.............. Of the many - space (having lost the garage layout, as cold/hot as it was, to a flood) and now working with unconnected modules....plays hell on passenger op's, which I love....but; I'm running trains so I guess I got nothing to cry about.
envirodude hit the nail on the head! I would love to model so many places and eras... At any rate, I have a nice layout, and it meets most of my givens/druthers. For example, 18" min radii mainline, only one short section of curve in the helix that's tighter, and only at 15.5". 2% grade compenated, #8 mainline turnouts where possible, hidden (off the modeled portion) staging, and DCC operation. The biggest compromise was leaving off some tunnels int he section I'm building of the Denver-Moffat Tunnel mainline. I had to omit tunnels 4, 11-15, and 21-29 due to space reasons. While they fit the plan, they simply don't fit the benchwork. So using short tunnel lengths, and utilizing the short tunnels as view breaks, a train will pass from scene to scene with relatively good prototype accuracy. For instance, Tunnel 2 exits to Bull Gulch, and Tunnel 3 and Tunnel 3 exits as Tunnel 5. Tunnel 6 similarly doubles as Tunnel 7, while Tunnel 8, old Tunnel 9 and Tunnel 10 are unmodified. Tunnel 10 exits as Tunnel 15, and from 16-21, the layout matches the prototype. The other problem is getting the layout to match signature curves and features on the real Moffat Route. Without more real estate, Plainview's signature S-curve near Rainbow Cut was shortened to a normal curve, and a hidden flyover inside Tunnel 10 (whose mountain also accomodates Tunnel 17) was required at South Draw (T12-17) to maintain the correct orientation of the tunnels as the RR progresses west. The signature shoofly at Old Tunnel 17 was also omitted to keep mainline curves reasonable. The biggest problem with a 9x12' space is trying to cram in too much railroad. If at the next house in the future I have less space, I'll build a HCD layout, and do only Tunnels 26-27, old T28, and T29 and a portion of Cliff siding. A simple loop with a siding would accomodate this, I think.
Having to kitbash or scratchbuild something because what I want isn't available... be it a structure (like the combination depot I am working on now), passenger cars (like Puddington) or whatever (can you say "neat little cabooses?").
Era. I have two boxes, each one has vehicles and buildings appropriate for an era. the eras being 1945-1960, and 1960-now. When I want to run steam and early diesel, I get out that box, and switch details, such as autos, trucks, and some structures. Ditto on the newer stuff. I'd like to be able to be a bit more specific, but don't want box after box of "stuff" to keep track of.
The biggest compromise, I had to shorten a scene on my Ford City Northern. The prototype for this scene is the WC/CN crossing of the Wisconsin River, on the westside of Stevens Point, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Central uses three thru-truss spans and two girder spans to cross the Wisconsin. Because of space, I had to settle for one of each. Also, the Dam consists of (12) twelve gates, I could only do three.... Jerry G.
I've done a lot of things I guess you could consider compromises.I live in probably one of the most diverse railroading areas anywhere,smack in the middle of the Anthracite coal fields.EVERYBODY ran here,probably as many as 15 or more major railroads just from 1960 to CR day,not to mention pool power and runthroughs.Nobody would live long enough to model it all,so I limited myself to one year,and one specific area.Now I'm only modeling TEN railroads,LOL!! I wanted 5 yards for the 5 major RR's that ran here in 1972,LV,EL,CNJ,D&H,and PRR/PC.Luckily,there were 3 small yards I could almost model entirely,and one large one for LV,all in the correct places geographically, I managed to squeeze in 4 where they belong operationally,and a hidden interchange track in Wilkes Barre for PRR,since PRR was all over all the systems anyway.Probably the 2 worst things on my RR,that I simply can't do anything about,are a bridge over the end of Coxton Yard to get the CNJ Penobscot track back over to the main at Penobscot after looping it around the end of the RR,and the loop itself,which is only 13" radius,which is a little tighter than I'd like,but it's not really a problem visually,since it's hidden anyway..
I envy those of you who have larger spaces and a in house room to build your layout. My biggest compromise: Having my layout in a metal shed. I would never recommend this. I was hoping to build it there and later move it into my mobile home. As it turns out I need the space I have to live in, entertain visitors and otherwise survive. The layout is actually to large to fit into a 12 foot single wide space. It would be difficult at best for me and/or emergency personnel to make entry and move freely around it. The second biggest compromise: I don have a classification yard. I have a staging yard and that helps as I can store trains and operate a variety of trains as opposed to just one running around the layout. My third compromise: I gave up an area that would have given me a stub end yard to place the Rio Bendejo Train Station. As part of a sweet deal I ended up with a train station and small city that resembles the ATSF San Bernardino Train station. Not much room for a switching yard but I managed to get three stub end tracks out in front of it. Those visitors who have managed to get here and view the layout have responded favorably. Most view it as overwhelming. Comments with regard to maintenance suggest it will be a nightmare. It hasn't been bad yet... we shall see. Still, I enjoy what I have and look forward to a time when I just might have better amenities. Time will tell... but I suspect my next living arrangement will be even smaller. We's have fun with what we's have.
Rick, some day I will get up there and check out your layout. I am not that far. Lots of mountain driving but thats ok in weather where there is no ice. I work for Arrowhead water and run relief up there most of the time so I know my way around a bit. My biggest compromise(mistake) is hidden staging with little to no access. I have three tracks that the turnouts after 4-5 years are still working well but I cannot see the trains unless I leave their ends out one side. Then if I allow the layout to sit to long its difficult to get things rolling again in there. I plan to add a camera but there is still track cleaning issues to deal with. A stall in there is very cumbersome to deal with. But I love staging.
Spidge, You are welcome any time. You might want to call ahead, just in case I headed down the hill, to visit your layout. Something I must do. Like you my hidden staging yard, will be difficult to access if and when the scenery goes in. Now, I can reach through and give a locomotive a nudge or clean the track. In the future, it won't be so easy or fun.
Actually, I have two compromises- tight radii and a short yard. I had to shoehorn my layout on a hollow-core door, thus the compromises. This led to yet another compromise, which isn't all bad considering the railroad I'm running- short freights.
Well, I run on a club layout, so the compromises aren't exactly mine. By far the biggest compromise, however, is train length vs. performance. I would love to run 20-25 foot trains, but getting such a train up our grades is pretty much impossible. 14' is about the max. And with that your putting everyone else in the hole... Yeah, there's some sidings that should really be longer.
I guess my biggest compromise is stopping work and dismantling what I had done on my expanded door layout.:munhappy: Last fall wife decided we were going to move, and I did not want to continue not knowing what kind of space I would have to work with. Since then the moving plan has been off and on several times, and currently off...with remodeling plans in the works that would leave no RR space except in a garage/shed. Prior to the moving plans, I would have to say space...if I only had one more foot. I called the layout "Compromise Junction".
