Missouri Great River Railroad

Discussion in 'N Scale' started by sysdfg, May 22, 2007.

  1. sysdfg

    sysdfg TrainBoard Member

    We have a name for the railroad. (Missouri Great River Railroad) Thanks for the help on the Yard designs.

    Nothing on the drawings is set in stone. I am open for discussion.

    This is the map, follow the route south. http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=2&S=15&Z=15&X=100&Y=686&W=1

    Okay, if you remember I was looking at a dual level. HO on the first.

    N on the second.

    This is if I stay with N for both levels (which is looking like a possiblity). I don't have the helix configs, so please don't ask yet. The first level will be Missouri and the second level would be Illinois for the coal.
  2. traingeekboy

    traingeekboy TrainBoard Member

    ahhh... the route of the Muddy Mo, I think I read about that on a fallen flags website. ;)

    Looks good. I think plan two looks best.

    At first I thought it was going to be a three tier layout. Just an IMHO, two different scale layouts of that size looks like alot of work, especially since they are basically the same layout. I would do two very distinct layouts for more variety.
  3. BoxcabE50

    BoxcabE50 Administrator Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    Two levels in one scale will result in much better operational possibilities. You'll be a lot happier going that route.


    Boxcab E50
  4. Mark Smith

    Mark Smith TrainBoard Member

    I sure like the layout of the double N scale plan best. Lots more room on the lower level. Will create a better sense of space and you'll benefit by needing a little less height between levels. And you can have one good long run using both levels. Go for it!
  5. sysdfg

    sysdfg TrainBoard Member

    Thanks Guys,
    I have a little more work I want to try on the third drawing concerning the yard layout. I will be focussing on just that one.

    I haven't even started any home work for the rail setup on the Illinois side. Focus will be on coal and maybe the Caterpillar plant. A lot of my relatives worked there at one time or another.
  6. Triplex

    Triplex TrainBoard Member

    I favor the two N decks, too. But that's because I'm operation-oriented, and thus favor small scales in general. However, if I think about it... it looks like the HO and N layouts are modelling the same geographical area, and I'll guess the same time period. If that's true, then I see no real benefit to the two scales.
  7. ppuinn

    ppuinn Staff Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    I like using both decks for N-Scale landscape...Lots of operation can be packed into the available space, and if you prefer setting trains up to orbit continuously, you could design 4 separate loops (2 on each level) that could be connected with double crossovers to permit running as one continuous double loop on each level. If you connect with a one track helix and some fancy electronics (auto reversing and auto reverse loop turnout control) or connect with a 2-track helix, you could run one VERY long grand loop by traversing the lower double loop, taking the helix up, traveling over the upper double loop, and taking the helix down to run it all again.

    Do you plan on operating just by yourself, or would you have one or two others helping? Two foot wide aisles are ok for one person but probably not for 2 and absolutely not for 3 or more. If you'll have company, then downsize the peninsula (maybe even eliminate it) so you have enough room in the aisles for 2 people to pass. Especially if you have 2 or more operators using multiple decks, you will definitely need people passing space.
  8. sysdfg

    sysdfg TrainBoard Member

    Helix should be a double tracked. Operations will be just me and maybe a couple of macaws. Right now I have to say no outsiders will be running on the track and I don't see that changing.

Share This Page