So here is my first prototype, Now i need to keep the lift out section as it sits infront the the door to the room. the style of the layout is mid 40s era steam with freight service and i would like to place a coal mine someplace along the top or left wall. There is about 6 inches of give on all sides for the layout to expand but until i can locate my tape measure i cant get solid numbers. I plan on running mostly medium and large steam which is why i gave it a minimum is 24 inch radii on the line, but most of them are above 30. I would like to keep the turntabe and roundhouse but things can move around. im in no hurry to start working till i know how things will fall into place.
Nice easygoing uncluttered plan. If you can connect your right-side switching area into the mainline around the middle of the right side, the alternate route that runs across the top of your plan could be used to stage a train that is "somewhere else."
You've got one switchback spur (at top right), but the lead is long, so it shouldn't be a source of frustration. Any particular reason for the large space between the main and passing track at top left? Not that I mind, just, what's going to be between them? You've got a turntable and roundhouse, but no yard. Again, not something that's necessarily wrong, but many people, particularly beginners, put a roundhouse in without thinking. What are your priorities? What region or railroad is this supposed to be? At least you can do the liftout. HO mainline curves would eat up most of the space in this size room. One thing I definitely like: The mainline doesn't follow the walls at all. Though I do see an S-curve with no straight (near the 6' mark on the left wall) that's asking for trouble with that big steam.
I really like this. Pretty nice plan for a small room. Kalmbach publishing makes a really nice book on shelf layouts. Lots of good ideas for the lift out. I also like how the track doesn't follow the wall. Any room for a staging yard?
The new added yard is very straight and static while all the other tracks with the curves look very dynamic. You might add a very light curve to the yard too to make it fit into the overall impression.
Your right, im still working on it but il take that into account. any recommendation on benchwork? i'm thinking of just doing a standard 1x3 shelf style but i dont know. that lift out section is going to be a pain. im sure.
Make it a swinging bridge vs lift out. Bob Chapparo did it as shown in these pix on the Model_Railroads_Of_Southern_California Yahoo Groups: Yahoo! Groups: Groups Error Yahoo! Groups: Groups Error It could open to your left as you enter your room like Bob did. BTW your layout plan has alot of room to expand. Recommend you build your layout framing w/ what ever top you're going to use then get some Flex track (easier than sectional). Then "design" your layout by putting the track down loosely. Then run some trains to see if your design gives you the kinds of operations you want.
Xiyn: Welcome to Trainboard! This project looks very interesting. Making decisions about what to add, change, or eliminate from your track plan gets easier if you can clarify the priorities of what you want for your layout. This is sometimes refered to as identifying your "Givens and Druthers". "Givens" are the factors that are mostly fixed (like room dimensions) or are relatively high priorities or preferences (perhaps scale, era, RR, or location; type of benchwork; continuous running versus mostly switching; DC versus DCC; complex versus simple track plan; minimum radius or maximum grades). You have already mentioned some of your givens or higher priorities (40s era freight/coal, donut track plan with liftout by door, 24" minimum radius). Where do you stand on long, continuous running versus switching, mostly one or the other, or a balance? Do you plan to operate by yourself, or will you often have another person running a train, too (so your plan should have "busy" areas separated so operators don't crowd each other. "Druthers" are aspects about the layout that you would like to have or include, but which are a little less important, so you would be willing to do without them if you had to (but if someone could come up with a way to include them without sacrificing any of your givens, you want them for your layout). Having a turntable may be one of your "druthers". Would you be interested in a twice-around plan (sometimes called a folded figure 8 plan) that incorporates a longer main? This would give you two loops around the room before going over the same track, but you'll have a much higher ratio of track to shelf surface area. Higher ratios mean there may be so much track that the lines of a track plan look like spaghetti strands in a bowl. Some people don't mind a high Spaghetti Bowl Factor because their priority is lots of switching or longer mainlines, but others place a higher importance on buildings or scenery and, for them, the increased operations opportunities are not worth the crowded appearance and reduced space for scenery/structures. Still others will find a balance point that is somewhere between. Is a single loop enough...Is a twice around, too crowded?
I agree it would be nice to see a givens and druthers list. I assum, given that the double track splits at the top, that this is a mountainous area such that there isn't room for main 1 and 2 to be next to each other.
You have a very wide open track plan with a multitude of scenic possibilities.:thumbs_up: Taking the curve aspect into account you may also wish to consider a double ended yard. This would work well given the overall length of your bench work and would yield a very prototypical result by providing bidirectional movement of arriving / departing trains. This would also reduce your reach to what is now the stub end of the yard and allow for an interesting scenic opportunity in the corner. Jerry
(Givens), 24" Radii for more smooth running of longer locos. Lift out section by door, set in stone as i cant fit a dog bone style with the space i have. Mainline style running, what im after is the ability to run longer engines and rolling stock smoothly rather than having more switching, but still would like a point A and point B to run cars to and from. (Side note) For me, my locos and rolling stock are like blank canvases, i wish to make them look and feel as prototypical as i can. once they are finished im after a smooth nice layout to run them on and enjoy my hard work in action. Layout will be build about 36-40" off the ground so it looks best wile sitting and i have a longer reach. (also im thinking is building a N scale layout above it, but thats way in the future) (Druthers), Mid 40s era coal industries with a more mountainous terrain to simulate a UP/SP coal lines. one thing i have thought of trying to add is a tunnel with a wood trestle at the end crossing a semi deep valley with a river. The longer the mainline run the better, but i havent been able to get what i see into XtrackCAD. I also really dont know what some of the longer locos will look like on 24-26" radii so i have been keeping the radii wider. (best i have right now is a C&O 2-8-4 Berk and a few bits of 22" track to use as a guide) ---- Im not opposed to a twice around plan. in fact i would like that more than what i have now but as ive mentioned. im a bit worried about the radii with my engines so i have been making them wider till i can get a solid idea.
Note that the boom in coal traffic from Wyoming/etc. started around 1970. In the 40s, most coal mining was in the east. Not that it didn't exist in the west, but I'm not sure if any of their mainlines qualified as "coal lines". For a twice-around, you'll have to either make the lift/swing section wider to accomodate both routes, or... one above the other?
Is that fixed? Coal is just another word for long trains with heavy engines (multiple). UP/SP does not sound like a small branch line. Do you really have the space to be comfortable with that? Jerry's comment to consider a double ended yard is very good. The prototype avoided single ended yards. Current single ended yards are often the result of removed turnouts when the traffic faded away. But that happened after the 40s era.
Not really set it stone, I'm fond of coal but i have a few ideas. I've thought of modeling in the mid 40s (43-44 and having a military style industry but i have not done much research yet. I could do a duel level lift out, but would need advice on how to build it. the only real things that are set in stone is Era Room size Lift out section. (Edited)
In that era you could build very dense brick buildings with all kind of loading docks and overhead cranes. Small spaces between the industrial buildings with street running tracks. You can run all kind of boxcars and do a lot of switching. The freight train would be locals with a heading consolidation. That engine would fit fine on your available space. A local with max. 10 40' boxcars would make the layout much larger.
I came up with this second track plan. What do you think? it will give me room for switching, industries and continues running. Im trying to keep it a bit simpler as this will be my first major layout project. Any suggestions?
