All I know is, it's more than I have. Like all modellers, I've drawn trackplans for spaces I don't have. Years of such planning, along with reading books by John Armstrong and Bruce Chubb, have helped me decide what I want. I've set my priorities, my "must have"s and my "want"s - my givens and druthers, as Armstrong would say. My question is, how much space is needed to fit this? Assume a generally rectangular area. Scale: N Gauge: Standard Prototype - Era: 1990s Region: Appalachians Railroad:? Governing rolling stock: SD80/90MAC, 89' autoracks, double-stacks, bi-level coaches, high-and-wide loads. Relative emphasis: Track/operation over scenic realism. Both mainline running and switching required in quantity. Operating priorities: 1-Long freight train operation (>20 70' cars) 2-Timetable operation (fast clock) 3-Local freight and terminal operations 4-Helper-district operations 5-Passenger train switching 6-Mainline passenger train operation (8-12 cars) Typical operating crew: ? Eye level (owner): 63 inches Further explanation: I have no desire to run medium-length freights, local passenger trains (they're obsolete), or commuter runs. If there wasn't space, I could accept eliminating passenger service entirely, as I would rather have none than a small amount. I'm only interested if I can fit a major passenger station. Even so, passenger operation would always remain a distant second to freight. A typical mainline freight would be 11 actual feet long including engines, a local 3 or 4. The mainline freight length is very restrictive. Because of the aforementioned lack of medium-length freights, almost all passing tracks must be 11' or greater between clearance points. (Single-track is what I want because that's what I know. I realize I could space things closer on double track. ) I also want at least that much clear length between passing tracks. The end has to leave one town before the engine reaches the next. Now, assuming I call each passing point a town (and add some spurs to make it one), I'll only be able to fit one town per 25 feet (a round number, on the safe side). There must be at least four stations other than the main one; this means at least 100' of main line EXCLUDING track within yard limits, staging track, and helix track. If I had room for more than four passing sidings, I might call some of them just that: sidings, not towns. Treat them as being out in the country and add no spurs. Also, the main yard's arrival/departure tracks must be able to handle those 11' trains without doubling. The classification tracks must be of large capacity for two reasons. 1-The yard must be able to make up and break down lots of those long trains. 2-I like big freight yards. It is acceptable for the main yard to be stub-type if it is the end of the line; otherwise, it should be double-ended. I like the approach on Bruce Chubb's old Sunset Valley - a double-ended yard at the end of the line. An efficient design, but I'd have to make mine longer. (His was designed for 9' HO trains.) The mainline can be loop-to-loop (both loops as staging, through yard near one end) or point-to-loop (from stub yard to staging) or continuous-run (hidden through staging, main yard near one end of visible run). Point-to-point is not acceptable. Center layover tracks are not wanted, though a hidden helix is acceptable. More than once through the scene is acceptable, but this should be only on a deep shelf or wide peninsula to avoid overcrowding. Double-decking is an assumed necessity. A double/triple-deck nolix like Pete Nolan's plan on this site is not a good option, for reasons discussed below pertaining to helper service. I'm short and flexible, but I expect to operate with people who aren't. A moderate duckunder (~60" clearance) is acceptable at the entrance only. Inside, one must be able to walk everywhere without ducking, so any overhead tracks away from the entrance must be at least 75" elevation. Trackwork should be commercially available Code 55 flextrack and turnouts. Heavy traffic will be the order of the day: ~20 trains in each direction in a fast-time day. I'm guessing this will take 6 to 12 operators, not unlike the Sunset Valley. This means a dispatcher's center, and aisles designed for a big crew. Industries should be suficiently large and numerous to justify that many trains. Coal mining, intermodal terminal, grain elevator, maybe a wharf. A steel mill is desirable, but I wouldn't want a dinky little one. Same goes for an auto plant (slightly less important than steel). I have a special interest in oversize loads and the cars used to ship them, but if I can't fit an industry that uses them, they will not be used, and their effect on clearances can be ignored. If they are used, restricted routing is not only acceptable but desirable. There's an additional constraint on the helper operation: it can't be the be-all-end-all of the railroad. Trains cannot run with helpers all the way. They will only be used on the main grade (probably a helix, since double-decking will be a necessity). The attachment and removal must be a visible operation. Preferably, neither should be done at the main yard. Helpers should be stabled near the base of the grade. AN IDEA: To justify the helpers not being attached at the main yard (if a steep outbound grade started not far away, that's what would be done), it's preferable for the main grade to be an obstacle to inbounds. ("Inbound" and "outbound" refer to the point-to-loop plan. For the loop-to-loop or continuous, these refer to travel over the longer visible route only.) Little ideas to make operation more interesting: -I might give one town a passing track only long enough for locals and give another a long lap siding; the overall length wouldn't be affected. -The typical mainline freight would run with 2 Dash 9s, 3 SD40s, or comparable. (Two SD40s or one Dash 9 would be attached as trailing or mid-train helpers for the grade.) However, sometimes I would want to run larger engine consists. From that, an idea developed. Run the occasional freight at least 20' long to justify such a lashup. I can't expect it to fit passing tracks, so I wouldn't try. Instead, its staggering length would be an operating feature. All other trains, whatever their class, would have to take the siding in meets. It would have to be doubled into yard tracks. It would use multiple helpers, possibly divided among mid-train and trailing - so it could run reliably up curves and grades, and just because it looks cool. One train of this length would run each way per "day" (that is, the train would leave the yard, lay over in staging, and return). The only accomodation it would require in track planning would be one staging track of twice-normal length. -The yard tracks are long enough to justify - in fact, to require - the use of heavy switchers. An SD38 or 39 with a slug would be the standard power. -Build a town like Limon, Colorado (where the Rock Island split or joined the Rocky Mountain Rocket - look in How to Operate Your Model Railroad for a plan) to use for splitting and combining passenger trains. Unlike mail-and-express trains, this type of passenger switching isn't obsolete. For those who don't have the book: West-east RI mainline through town. NW-SE UP line crosses at grade. Interchange track connects NW UP and E RI lines. RI has trckage rights over UP on NW line (not SE). Westbound limited is split onto W and NW lines; reverse occurs eastbound. The cross track might have to be a dummy (a functional crossing, but not connecting to anything). The diverging routes might earn their keep as the entrances to a return loop. Do remember that passenger operation can be entirely eliminated if necessary, and if so, this town plan is out of consideration. -A branch is usual on layouts of any size. If I had a lot of space, I'd make it terminate in a small yard resembling the old joint SAL/ACL/L&N operation in Chattahoochee, Florida. To explain for those who don't know: A small double-ended yard (with no leads!) with one stub track long enough for a mainline freight. Two foreign roads' mainlines arrive, one from each end. My main railroad's branch would join one of those lines beyond the yard limit. Operations were unusual. Inbound trains were immediately switched into several of the short body tracks; there was no arrival track. The long spur was used as the departure track, with the complication that neither the engines (for departures one way) nor the caboose (for the other way) could be put in first. The yard served as both classification and interchange yard. The ultimate in real-life condensation, but too restrictive to use on a high-traffic model mainline. My plans are ambitious. I like big-time railroading. I'm sure there's a critical point as a room expands at which most of my desired features become possible. What is that point? I'm currently thinking ~200 square feet, based on sketches I made and various published track plans for comparison. However, my initial math suggested most of these features could be done in less. I always heard that you could run 30-car freights in a spare bedroom in N, but that doesn't seem practical.
Not sure where to start but here we go. With the freight and passengers listed you will want as broad of corners as possible, like 18"+. That shouldn't be a problem concidering the size room you'll need to fit everything else. I like my layout high but eye level is a little much. difficult to reach up and back, limiting the depth of layout. Dropping it to shoulder level makes it easier to work on and easier to opperate because you can reach. Anyone shorter than you would not be able to opperate on your layout at eye level, and you want 6-12 opperators. You mentioned helper service but you list no ruling grade. Kinda pointless to have helpers on a level layout. Helpers on a helix is kinda like scenicing a hidden staging yard. With a grade, eye level would be your maximum height, somewhere towards the middle I'd assume. Once again allowances should be made for shorter opperators. 20 11' trains will need at least a 3' X 15' (conservatively) stub end yard. More for double ended. 3' would be too deep for a shelf so they would need to be accessable from both sides. 20 trains each way would mean two such yards. That would be 5 trains an hour each way, one every 12 min, including helper cutting in/out, in a 4 hour opperating session. With yard leads and a helper district your 100' main could easily double. Your goals sound more like that of a club. With everything you want to include I think you would need a 20'X 30' room for a single level layout, to get aisles wide enough to handle the high number of opperators you have in mind. Do you have that many friends into model railroading? Lots of opperators, lots of trains, lots of construction/track laying/scenicing, and frankly lots of exspense. I'm not trying to be a buzz kill, but when concidering a layout of this magnatude, resources must be carefully managed. Having a space big enough is a small part of it. Time, money, effort, and help are bigger keys to the completion of a layout. [ August 08, 2005, 04:14 AM: Message edited by: BALOU LINE ]
11' passing sidings... uhhhh, A big space? I'm thinking a rom thats about 10 x 20 feet Atleast. What kind of space do you actually have?
John- Actually, I don't specifically want 6+ operators, but I realize a heavy-traffic layout couldn't be operated in fast time with less. I realized I needed to actually allow for 200' of mainline in total. The annoying thing is, I can find plans that convince me I could fit that much mainline into 200 square feet - but only if 1-3 operators are assumed. That's not enough to handle that much track at once, unless you treat it as a branch with light traffic. And, since it seems to both of us that the operating crew would be a space hog, and I would have to round up more people than I currently can, how would you suggest achieving similar results with less people? I'm not sure yet what ruling grade I want. When you talked about the yard size problem, you referred to 'two such yards', so I'm guessing you're talking about staging. Well, the point-to-loop plan would only need one staging yard. Since some trains would return during the same session, it could have distinctly fewer than 20 tracks. I wanted to find a way to put it overhead, but I couldn't find a way to make the grades work... "With a grade, eye level would be your maximum height, somewhere towards the middle I'd assume," you said. What exactly did you mean there? Maybe my problem stems from the limits to my suspension of disbelief - I can't accept a small layout representing heavy-duty mainline railroading. I like big engines but hate the sight of overpowered trains. You should be glad that I didn't ask you for help with my second choice - PRR circa 1950. That would have slightly shorter trains, but considerable quadruple-tracking, very heavy traffic and the requirement of a compression ratio not greater than 15:1 and preferably 10:1.
You're in the Calgary area. Why noy get ahold of Mike Hagarty. He's up there in the Calgary area, too, and he has a VERY grand layout with a lot of the things you are looking for. He's had others visit. We're all friends here. I'd think that he'd show you around and you'd be able to see some of the challenges involved with something that big. Just a suggestion
Heavy traffic with few operators- this is a real paradox. Maybe opperators could run more than one train, but that would be difficult and probably dangerous. I supose with DCC it could be programed to run the main line automatically in and out of staging while you run switching. That is far out of my expertise so I couldn't say how practical of an idea it is. You could always have a continual running loop with the same train in and out of the scene. However that isn't a real accurate way to depict "heavy traffic", although it would relax staging needs. With staging I always go back to the gosple according to John (Armstrong)lan for twice as much as you think you'll need. As far as the grade goes,obviously anything higher than eye level will not be easily viewable. Because you would like helper service, but not as a "be all to end all", you will want to show what the train does before and after helper, as well as have room to cut the helpers in and out. That's why I suggested towards the middle of the layout. After giving it some thought I supose trains could enter or exit staging with the helpers which would allow the grade to be at either end, but means more off layout switching between sessions.
John- I don't want trains to enter or exit staging or the main yard with helpers attached. To keep the number of staging tracks within reasonable bounds, some trains should be expected to return in the same session (or is that an outdated idea?) I don't want to have to attach or remove helpers in staging. I thought about automatic track control, but from what I know (which isn't much) it seems limiting. Can automatic trains engage in meets/passes with operator-controlled trains (which may or may not be running on time)? I don't believe so. The mainline isn't just for nonstop through running. I'm looking for local freights working down the line, not just yard switching. Mainline running and switching should be interrelated. You said "a 4 hour operating session"- is 6:1 fast time the default now? Or is it just what you use?
Why not cut helpers off as they enter staging. If you modelled something like the B&O's summit at Sandpatch, use the tunnel for the scenic block to enter staging, (I'd set that up as a set of return loops) and cut the (assuming rear) helpers off as the train enters the tunnel. Keeping it right to one end of your route would let you run helpers past two 'towns' yet still keep it away from the main yard. And that's not unprototypical either, taking the same prototype the helper pocket is at Hyndman, the bottom of the steep grade, but that location is not that many miles from Cumberland yard. Keeping those separate would also let you run helper sets light back to the yard to refuel every so often, giving a bit more action on that bit of railroad. That would be possible with DCC I believe, computer controlled trains that reacting to signal indications are possible, and if you have a dispatcher then he could be 'controlling' those trains using the signalling.
Hmmm. My a-building pike is in 288 square feet and doesn't include half of what you are looking for. I may have a greater emphasis on scenic sincerity, though, and it is single level. I've got to agree with John that 20 X 30 feet may be more realistic for this. If you go that large, you'd better have a lot of time to devote to construction and maintenance! David
Because of the LONG list of requirements you have, I'll try and summarize them. 1. You want multiple main-lines for continuous running. Some "short" for a local, and some long. 2. You want long passing sidings to match up with your long trains. 3. You want large yards at each "end" of the layout. 4. You want to be able to accomodate fairly large number of operators. I'd suggest starting with some basic construction "rules". After you settle on the rules, I'd make paper cutouts of the various building blocks and start shuffling them around on a piece of paper. 1. 4' aisles for most of the spaces. You'll have lots of people milling around. 2. Peninsulas will require 9' of space for the width. That's 4' of aisle, plus 2.5' on one side of the peninsula, plus 2.5' on the other side. The aisle on the other side will be taken up by the next building block. I'm further assuming that the "blob" will be larger, and that the aisles will be necked down only at these points. I'd also suggest a minimum length of the peninsula to be 9'. This is a purely arbitrary number, but will help you in making the building blocks. 3. Benchwork depth of 30". You can make it deeper in some areas, but I'd start with that as a "standard". 4. Yard size. I'd make a couple of yard templates of 30" X 15' to move around as well. Other design rules to apply once you finish laying out the benchwork are: A. Minimum curve radius. B. Maximum track grade. C. Maximum rate of grade change. D. Minimum turnout number. I'm guessing that the final room layout will be in the shape of an "E", with maybe two peninsulas. I'm not a big fan of double decking a layout, but it could be done to stash another town. Mark in Utah
Martyn- That advice about the bottom of Sand Patch grade will allow more planning freedom. Thanks! About the top, though - I was thinking midtrain helpers at least some of the time. That'll require more track at the summit - say, a passing track and a spur. If the crew size problem can be solved, I know it won't take as much space as John or David think. I'll explain. If you don't have 20 Custom Designed Track Plans by John Armstrong, get a copy from your local library. Turn to pages 43-45, and you'll see the Southern Pacific Shasta Route in 19'3" x 11'6" in HO. Now, imagine building the same plan in the same space in N. The mainline and passing tracks are long enough. The tight aisle on the right can be helped by using N scale's smaller curves to shrink the end of the peninsula. Now, that's not exactly what I want, but there's enough stuff there to convince me the space is good. Now turn to pages 58-60: the Erie-Lackawanna in N scale in an incomplete 14' x 15' space. This one needs a lot of changes, but try and follow me. First, make both main routes single-track. Don't let them connect at Chenango Mills Junction, and eliminate all but 1 or 2 of the tracks in the Southern Tier Loop. Now, you have an out-and-back plan. Remove the passenger yard, combining Hoboken, Kearney and Pavonia into one large stub freight yard. Disconnect the Lackawanna route from this new yard. Just run it alongside and connect it (instead of the yard) to the hidden turnback curve; let that curve lead into a staging yard underneath, with a return loop under the Lackawanna helix. The schematic is now a point-to-loop: from the combined yard to Port Jervis, up the Erie helix, over Starrucca, through the junction to the Coriolanus branch, around the turnback curve that remains from the Southern Tier, over Tunkhannock, down the Lackawanna helix, continuing visible for at least a train length along the right side of the peninsula, then entering the hidden track to staging. The grade on the Erie helix can be reduced to avoid helpers, as 3.25" between turns is more than necessary. Port Jervis can be raised slightly to reduce the grade beyond the helix, over Starrucca. The only steep grade left is the Lackawanna helix. By raising the Factoryville-Nicholson area slightly, you extend the grade into the visible trackage. And there's a helper district for trains headed toward the main yard, with a 2.6% ruling grade. Helpers will have to be attached just after a train comes out of staging. It might be possible to rig a continuous-running connection for open-top trains, since the ends of the line are so near each other. About 190 feet of mainline between West Secaucus and the entrance to staging, thanks to an extra turn in the Erie helix, about 120' of that visible. Without the roundhouse, the aisle can be widened at that point, though they're still fairly tight all around. Again, the space seems good - thought the narrow shelves do limit industrial possibilities. I still might be able to fit a steel mill on the Coriolanus branch, or in the Hancock-Great Bend area if I remove Starrucca and maintain the scenic independence of the decks.
Mark- You're wrong about some of that summary. I want only one large visible yard, but staging wil have to be extensive. Continuous running isn't a necessity. I certainly don't want multiple main routes. One branch is fine, but the idea is for the locals and through trains to weave past each other on the same single-track-with-sidings trunk line that is as long as possible. And why would 'blobs' be necessary, if peninsulas were 5' wide? You can certainly fit any N scale turnback curve in that width! EDIT: Oh, I see. That would apply to a center peninsula, but shelves would have to bulge. I still don't think it would be a problem. [ August 09, 2005, 05:25 PM: Message edited by: Triplex ]
Mark- You got me thinking. Deep shelves and wide aisles, and fewer of both, are the way to go. This plan http://www.maj.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=230477 isn't perfect, but it proves that it's possible. It was inspired by an earlier version of this plan http://www.railimages.com/gallery/album130 discussed in this topic http://www.trainboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/f/33/t/000712/p/1.html? In a 10' x 20' hypothetical space (such as a single-car garage), it fits more mainline than my requirement. The large center area, 5' wide for 11' of its length, allows room for many operators. The dispatcher's panel is in the corner under the upper deck, so he's out of the way of the rest of the crew. The helper grade climbs ~18" in ~50', so say 3%. It is a nolix along three walls. There's enough room on the upper deck for the massive iron/steel complex and the auto plant, or whatever else I might choose to put there. There could be about 5'8" clearance under that bridge over the entrance. No problem, just add some telltale strings outside. I'm not happy with the staging; it's too close above the upper deck, even though it is above eye level. In this preliminary version, it's accessed by a nolix at 1.5%. There's a lot to be worked out, but as before, it's evidence that 200 square feet is enough space. This time, with better room for the crew.
Triplex, I'd make up templates of the building blocks you want, and shuffle them around to give you what you like. The general tendency of designers is to try and cram as much trackwork as possible into as small a space as possible. I was doing that to myself until I came to that realization and did an about face on my design. It takes up more space, but gave me more flexibility on the design as well as lots more room for scenery. Make sure you leave PLENTY of space for scenery, as well as "lead up" space into any scenery change. I just wish I had as much space as you do. I only have a 9' X 14' room to work with, and I have to maintain access to a closet on one of the long sides. Mark in Utah
Read my first post, Mark. I don't have this space, and that's the point of this discussion. Read the first post. I'm trying to find a minimum; that's why cramping is acceptable here. And yes, I would build in that minimum space because scenic sincerity is not a high priority. Now that I drew that last sketch, I'm thinking the plan could be shortened by a couple feet and still work. Its simple benchwork arrangement could easily be adapted to different door locations. Considering my rough plan, what do you think? What advice would you give? I've got an idea myself: I can add a branch on the upper deck, maybe down one side (the one not occupied by the industrial complex) and the end. Since it will usually see only short trains, passing tracks and the space between them can be shorter than on the main and it can still look right. Unlike on some layouts, I'd still use broad curves on the branch because long engines or cars might run on it (just not in long consists).
I think you need to buy this guys house that I know...he has a 29 x 19' room for a layout, with central stairs, no doors, and no windows... the perfect train room
I think that's a personal choice. Concidering you want a high volume of traffic I agree it would be difficult to stage that many trains. It is not uncommon to see the same "type" of train run either direction. However you may find later you wish you could add just one more manifest to that list... ...so my point is either put in more staging than you think you want, or leave room to expand it later. Oh I'm with ya here! I supose on the perfect layout it would run them in and out of available staging too. ( I'd have to win the lottery and pay someone to do that for me ) 4 hours is a long session. 6 hours would be pushing it. It can be tough to get three or four guys over for more than 4 hours of "trains", plus BS time before and after. If each session is a shift rather than a day it greatly improves the ratio. As an added bonus it will reduce the number of repete trains per session, decreasing the demands of staging.
John- I wasn't thinking slower, but faster - maybe 8:1 fast time for a 3 hour session. Regarding staging, it seems that in a room large enough for the rest of the layout, I could get in a lot. That figure of 40 trains per session includes both scheduled trains and extras, so I'd design the schedule to always leave some staging tracks clear for the extras. In fact, for more than I would expect to run. I'll probably design for a 20-track main staging yard, plus some interchange fiddle trackage if I can find a good spot for it.
