Here is my newest layout plan: Givens: room size: 13'x13' must be small and portable in case i decide to keep it when i move out Druthers: N scale relatively easy to build mainline connecting 2 towns and a coal mine branch expandability coal trestle tunnel bridge the coal mine is really more like visible staging. I believe everything is self explanatory, if not just ask. All questions and comments are welcome. Thanks.
I like the simplicity of the design, but I would have some concerns about switching the town area along the top edge of the drawing. If that edge is against a wall, reaching over the mountain/backdrop could cause problems. Assuming those are 12" squares, just reaching the turnouts without a backdrop might be difficult.
the only side against a wall will be the left side, even then ill be able to pull it back to get to the staging and the turnout in the tunnel. there will be a hole in the fascia to reach the turnout.
The kid's room look like this (from a thread on the Kalmbach model railroader forums): He also has gotten quite a few suggestions over on the MR forums, mostly from forum participant Paulus Jas. Some of the suggestions he already has gotten (top of drawings is up against left wall of room) Or this one: Smile, Stein
yep, i was going to go with one of those plans but i thought to myself "can you really finish a layout that big in only a couple of years with your limited funds?" and i realized that i probably couldn't, at least not realistically. Though i am very grateful for the help and the track plans, there will always be a next time. Thus the scaling back to a simple HCD and a 22" shelf attached to the left.
Just my thoughts: The mine, (I feel), should be in the mountains. You have a great opportunity to do an "Empties in / Loads out" scene using the backdrop. Empties enter the mine on one side passing under the tipples and then through the divider. Loads come through the divider under the tipples appearing to have just been loaded. No, it's not perfect and the mind knows full well what is happening but turns it off. The mine track in this case is in addition to the main line. On the town side it could be coming out from under a highway bridge. For the size of the layout you have way too much staging plus the interchange yard - but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Ideas: Treat one of the staging yards as an interchange Put an industrial area where the interchange and extend it around to the left. or Extend the length of the oval in increase the main line. These are more opinions that actual issues.
The mine will be in the mountains, that is why i made that side of the backdrop so wide, so that the ground would rise behind the tracks and form mountains and hide the transition between ground and back drop. The empties in loads out thing is a good idea, I never thought of it, I’ll have to see if i can work it in. The layout has so much staging because I wanted enough for op sessions and a couple of tracks for “fun trains” and similar without having to mess with all of the cars/locos every time I wanted to run something unusual. There are two staging yards so that I could have one at each “end” of the railroad. The interchange yard would work like this: Loco comes from mine branch with a cut of loaded hoppers and drops them off on the interchange. Yard switcher then takes the loads and sorts them into east- and westbound cuts. Empties are brought to the interchange yard by through trains. The yard switcher cuts out the empties and puts them into the yard then putting in loads that are going the same direction as the train. So, anything unclear about my ideas? By the way, what are some industries that use a lot of coal that I could pair with the mine?
Power plants or industries with their own power plants. Um, you could use the same thing "loads in / empties out" on a power plant which could be the opposite side of the divider from the coal mine.
Well, loads in/empties out and a source-destination pair is a cute trick for a big layout, but for a small layout it is a one-trick pony, compared to taking loads to staging or from staging to two different unrelated industries. With loads in/empties out, you move short trains that one commodity over and over and over again, from the same place to the same place, half a loop away, instead of simulating many different kinds of traffic from many places (off layout) to industries on the layout, and from industries on the layout to many other places (off layout). For whatever it is worth, you can see an example of a loads in/empties out scheme on Harold Minky's old On30 4x8 foot first stage of his Pacific Coast Air Line here: http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/4x8/trackplanning/ Btw - I am still not all that convinced that the 19-turnout plan TL12 has come up with is all that much simpler than the 16-turnout Apple Valley/Blackville plan that Paulus Jas suggested for him. For my taste, it has too much single ended staging. With two clusters of single ended staging, instead of the double ended staging suggested in the Paulus Jas plan, there is little possibility of re-running trains during the session - trains will have to be backed out from destination staging and backed into source staging prior to the next operating session. Or leave the visible layout by backing into the staging track they originally came from instead of driving into destination staging, if you want zero re-stage time between the sessions. Also, the mine is right next to the interchange yard, instead of on the opposite side of the backdrop, as in both Paulus Jas suggestions above, pretty much ruining the illusion that a branch line leads to the mine. Basically, the latest TL plan is more a plan for running a few more trains on a single track mainline with passing sidings at the town and at the interchange yard, but not having a junction and branch line feel. Should work okay as drawn, if that actually is the design goal. Stein
