After looking at The layout procrastinators thread. I realized that it would be better to build a small layout that works, than try to build something that may not even ever get built. I decided to build a small micro layout that will be 2x4 feet with 2x2 foot staging areas on each end. I was able to fit a decent amount of switching in a small place and still have enough room for scenery and staging. I like the Idea of build a micro layout because It will take quicker to build and it will be alot cheaper. I already have the benchwork done, so It shouldn't take too much longer to get it running I am wondering if this layout will have enough operations to keep me interested or should I go with another design?
Hi Justin, This looks similar to something I have been working on (at least the concept of small shelf, switching layout). It is a good teaching project and gives you a lot of skills without the huge investment. Good luck with it! Just a quick question. Are those transfer plates on either side? How had you planned on building these? I am curious for my own use... Also, I am guessing you have looked at the "Micro-Small Layouts" website. Tons of great ideas there... Again, Good luck!
Justin, Looks good. I don't think you want to have the road running through your turnouts however. Move it a smidge to the left. Cheers, Jim CCRR/Socalz44
IF you're drawing that on XTrackCAD, you can use the Train simulator to run some operations on it and see for yourself how well you like it. It'll also point out if you have any practical problems with the design (unreachable spots, etc). I've found that feature quite useful!
Here is another plan for a micro layout I don't really know if I could call it a micro layout but it is fairly small. This plan has more varied industries instead of all warehouses like my last plan There is a fruit packing warehouse on the top-left, a brewery at the lower-left a Bakery at the top-right and a scrap-yard at the lower-right I am still deciding whether I should build a transfer table for the staging, or just make it a fiddle yard. This plan should allow for more operations since many industries need cars at certain spots, like the corn-syrup loading at the bakery. I am still designing some other track-plans so if anybody has any other Ideas please share!
I think the transfer table is sort of a waste of space on these designs. You have a lot of open space in front of it and it looks like a hassle to switch it. I know that the brits make sector plates where they can store whole cassettes of trains, and then there is the train cassette concept where you attach a whole made up train to the layout to bring it out of storage. What if you design all the way into that space? I saw a door panel layout at a train show once that was made with peco #2 switches and 15" radius curves. Your square footage on that layout is 16 sq. ft. Maybe you can go for a foot print with a longer run for switching like in a corner of a room. Maybe a 1x6 that butts up against a 2x5 to make an L.
I agree with geeky, that transfer table takes up way more real estate than it's worth. Small layouts and staging really dont mix, especially with micro layouts. If you are concerned about adding/removing stock and locomotives on the layout, for something this small, I would just use the ol' five finger crane. You might build a shelf of the same footprint directly below this layout for your staging tracks where you can store equipment. Then after having your fill switching equipment on the layout simply reach under and make a quick swap and your ready for the next scenario. In the space the transfer takes up, you could easily add another industry and extend the passing siding to allow more flexible operations.
I too (or three?) would get rid of the transfer table. I like your design and think you will find it enjoyable. Now if you want and can, you could create an L shaped layout that has the main and a passing siding, which can serve as your staging yard while keep your costs down as well. A site you may want to check out is : Andrew Martins Layout Design Gallery - Home Now Andrew's layouts are HO but you can easily convert them. And you know what, use this layout to learn on. Build in sections. Do the scenery, then add an extension. Do the scenery there, remembering the lessons learned. By then you may of come up something you like better or a tweak you want on the first section. Who says you can't do a complete rebuild? I've seen people do this with layouts, where they end up going around the room, one section at a time and once they reach the first section the rip it down to "improve" it.
Thanks for the help guys! I will be getting rid of the transfer table and replacing it with a cassette at the end of the table. I am still looking at some other designs, I want it to be mostly scenery, but have few industries that will take awhile to switch. I will be posting some designs that I have come up with in the next few days. If anyone has any designs that they would like to share, I would be more than happy to see them!
I was looking through some of my model Railroader Magazines and I stumbled upon one of David Barrow's articles on Operation, He showed his South-Plains district as an example of the Minimum operating layout. I really liked his industrial switching area track-plan so I Created this version in Xtrkcad. Its not a Micro-layout like I wanted in the beginning, but it is still pretty good At first I was put of because of the switchbacks required to get to most of the industries, but after running trains with it, I found that the switchbacks made the operations alot funner. My plan is to build this one now and then I can add it to my "dream" layout that I will build when I am older. I suppose this track-plan shouldn't be too bad if it was build and deigned with the beginner to operations in mind, but I have to ask: is there any problems with this track-plan that you guys can see?
Hi Justin I think your layout looks fine, my only worry is the short leads/tails on the two switchbacks. As I see it, you will only be able to put one car at the time into the switchbacktracks. If it was my layout, I would want to be able to put 2-3 cars in at the time on a layout that size. Or the highest number of cars that the biggest industry can take. /Carsten.
Depending on what you call 'micro', I don't necessarily agree with that statement about staging. My Hickory Valley is 18x36", that has a loop-to-loop (stacked) with a storage track on the bottom as well so two trains can be stored out of sight. Now mind you, that resulted in a 4% grade on 8" curves, figure a locomotive and five cars is about it. The way the scenery is designed (steep vertical hillside) its accessible from the back. The new Ross Run module is 20x48", that let me step up to 9" curves, the switchback design for the logging module also let me build a staging yard underneath that holds up to five short trains; again, the grades are running around 4% but this is logging, could just as easily be mining. The Chadakoin Industrial that I just designed for a friend is on 30x48; when I did the full-sized design using actual components I ended up with two 12-car holding tracks stuffed inside industrial buildings and behind the 'backdrop'. That's a more conventional small layout, no real grades, just two tracks across the back for holding/staging, but 8" curves to pull it off. With 30" width that wasn't that impossible. So it all depends; if you can get 18" width its possible to drop, steeply, and get underneath the visible layer. That doesn't mean you should or would do it, I'm just saying that it really is possible. The Ross Run design evolved mostly because I now have two Shays, three Climax, and two rod locomotives, lots and lots of bitty 25' log cars, and no place to put them, so a bunch of holding tracks with short trains of log cars (loaded and empties) was a requirement. But yeah, it borders on insanity and was difficult to design and build. It also requires that a lot of scenery is designed as 'lift-off' chunks to be able to easily access underneath as that entire lower level is hidden. Where the alligator clips are is under the log pond. (there's a joke in there somewhere..). It's running and finished now, just not sceniced. Sure is a great module to show off geared steam, which is why I built it. It was deliberately designed to show off the right-hand side of an Atlas Shay, working uphill through switchbacks and reverse curves. It can be combined with the existing Hickory Valley or run stand-alone, and there are tracks coming off of it in several directions for future modules as well. http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/rossrun2.jpg The other thing you need to remember is that there a lots of choices (some vintage) for tight switches if you can live with C80 - the Peco SL is a dandy micro-switch with a 9" radius, and Trix had 8" switches back in the day - that's what I used on the HV. Trix also made a super-tight curved switch and I used two of them on the Ross Run, had to get them used off 'bay but it was worth it. If you're stuck on conventional track and CAD designs you're missing most of the fun with micro-layout designs. This isn't mainline, this is industrial (creeping) track, so the tradeoffs between equipment and operations are wide-open. If you bury C80 in dirt and weeds like I do the end result is fine.
