Look at the Great John Allen. His Gorre & Daphetid was originally a 4X8 layout that was expanded on and built into probablly one of the most well known layouts in model RR history.
Or to put it another way, there is no reason why you can't build a series of small point-to-point switching layouts to experiment with different aspects of the hobby before combining them together into one continuous running monster layout.
I built this layout, starting Feb 2000. It is my 4th layout, starting with my boyhood HO layout and switching to N-scale when re-entering model railroading in 1995. It is about 200 sq ft in two decks, connected with a 5½ turn double-track helix. It is built after a prototype and era, as shown in the video. Still a lot to do, would be nice with working signals for example. I could use another 200 sq ft! The video may give you a hunch of the dispostions in my train room. Somewhere I have a digital format track plan I could submit (if I can find it). Good luck with your outbuilding and: Think Big! (especially regarding curve radius, where maybe I should have thought bigger) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhnRIFn1Vh0
Well, we can vouch that the Original Poster's ego is healthy, at least. Model railroading is unlike other model building in that it requires the use of many varied skills in construction, wiring, etc. Anyone would benefit from building a smaller layout before embarking on a giant project, even if just to get a few mistakes out of the way without wasting a lot of money. But as Strother Martin (The Captain) said in Cool Hand Luke, "Some men you just can't reach." Good luck.
Sir (or Madam as the case may be), This is your second post encountering me on the issue of actions I plan in pursuit of my own satisfaction. In both instances I detect an unsought tinge of hostility edged with a dollop of irony and a cover of ridicule. You are the one unwelcome exception to the many others here who's posts here, critical and otherwise, are helpful to me, which after all was what I solicited. You would be well advised to go stand in a corner and reflect on what seems to be your penchant for graceless communication, and the reason you need to be that way. In any event, I would be pleased not to hear from you again in this thread.
Cosmic... You seem to know what you want and thats a good first step. Hopefully you can find the right building to fit your needs. I do ask, what era and railroad do you plan to work with? I ask because there are some track limitations with steam when it comes to curves and switching. And realism. I would imagine that being 84 you remember the steam era well. If not chased some good locomotives! Those would be good stories to hear about! A lot of plans you will find online, or in books are heavy towards switching and operations. You might discover that as you run trains, and watching them run around, that something is missing. So do have some industry and switching. That tends to keep that bug out of the ear and lends to the realistic effect. With that, I wish you good luck sir! And keep us posted with your ideas and stories.. Sent from my Commando
And I would be pleased if you heeded the advice of those with more experience in this hobby, for your own sake ... but we may both have to learn to live with disappointment.
Consider this a "warning shot" of sorts - some of the back-and-forth within this thread is edging into personal argument territory. This will stop. If there is advice to be offered, do so. If people choose to accept or not, that is their choice. This site is supposed to be a friendly place, for exchange of knowledge and ideas. Let's keep it that way.
MC, Byron's website is fabulous! Not only track plans, but enormous food for thought in his sections on design and especially operations. Makes me realize that I'll be spending considerable time in processing this material before I even pick up a tool. Thanks.
Truly beautiful! Makes one realize, everyone has his absolute limit. I don't think I would ever aspire to that level of accomplishment. Inspiring nevertheless.
Since you seem set on starting big rather than building up to a big layout, what you could do is the old trick of using the mainline and industry footprints from an HO scale track plan as the start point for creating a N scale track plan. I mean, an 18" radius curve in HO scale is tight. However, in N scale...
Inspiring, no doubt. I have read and re-read my John Allen book. But as I recall, when asked about the giant G&D, in his later years John was supposed to have answered that were he to start all over, he'd not have done it again.
This presentation, from an NMRA clinic, might help you to identify and prioritize your objectives, whether you design the layout yourself, select a plan already done or have it created professionally. http://www.nmra.org.au/Clinics/Design clinic.pdf
Thank you. I've read the first 2 pages. I've downloaded the PDF so I can study it at leisure. It's true at this point that I'm short of enough knowledge to know what I want in anything like the specific terms necessary for planning. All I know is what looks good to me in general. Like for instance, I love high trestles, multilevels, and tunnels. Does everyone?
After some conversion work, I could finally upload the trackplan. The lower level has been revised in 2009. The freelanced Russell, Ky yards, with steel mill and coke works are gone, since I felt it was not consistent with the new River SD. Instead a new yard, more prototypically patterned after Handley, WVa has been built, which you see in the video. Some translation from Swedish: Stålverk=Steel mill, Koksverk=Coking plant, Oljeraff.=Oil refinery, Tågmagasin med vändslinga=Staging yard with return loop
