Another possibility for the industry in the middle is a flour mill with lots of history. The original facility would have used some hydro power from the river and at one time possibly shipped and received on the river, but has undergone expansion and modernization and now receives corn and wheat via coverd hoppers and ships out flour and meal via airslides and trucks, maybe even bagged products in box cars. The lower right maybe is a soybean processing facility, on one track they receive soy beans and ship the spent byproducts, the other track loads tank cars with bean oil. Flour mill example: http://goo.gl/maps/8no4d and a bean processor examples: http://goo.gl/maps/Xdr6v http://goo.gl/maps/JeJFw Operationally it would be very similar to the barge transloading example above, class 1 operates the main line, local industrial railroad switches the industries.
Kalbert- The yard on the original plan had the spur closest to the river, which I had to get rid of because of space. I built this new plan on the existing bench work I had from a previous track plan. The original DKS plan also had the interchange on the left side. Well, AnyRail allows you to connect three Kato #4 switches in that manner, but in real life, it doesn't work. So that was eliminated. Finally, I got rid of the second spur on the lower right so this could become my interchange. It might not be ideal, but the crux of the track plan was not hindered. The lowest spur next to the river (in the original plan) was not designed for delivery by ship. With the fixed truss bridge there is only clearance for only small commercial vessels. That's why it was designed with the wharf on the 'downstream' side of the bridge. I come from a five generation farming family, and I live in the Sacramento Valley. The Valley here is the world's fifth largest supplier of food, cotton, and other agricultural commodities. In addition, the aquatic veins of the Sacramento Delta keep this massive agricultural area irrigated, and provides water for 22 million people. So naturally, I am also very farm and river minded. I've already been thinking that way ;-) As for planning industries prior to track planning like you suggested: well, I first looked for a track plan that met my desires, and would fit in the 40" x 84" space that was available to me. When this plan was designed for me, I loved it. I figured the few place holders for industries would work just fine. I was also fine with determining those industries down the road (ie now) I also wanted natural scenery to be a bigger part of the layout, than the built environment. The plan provided the ability to roundy round two trains at once, while being able to build a third train on the yard/runaround. To me, that sounded entertaining to do even if this were simply a grass mat layout! - - - As I said, my plan now is to add land (foam) next to the innermost spur of the 'yard' This will provide plenty of room for logging/lumber, grain elevator, etc. I may also have an element of the small repairs shop and two stall shed. I have high expectations for my first 'real' layout -expectations that are likely beyond my skills or knowledge. But overall, I'm happy with the way this layout is turning out. Most importantly, it's providing what I hoped it would: the enjoyment of tinkering on trains & scenery, designing & building my own little piece of the world, and a great model railroad learning experience! One day, when I'm older and even more settled down, I hope to build a full prototypical, room-sized layout. Cheers Noah
My .02.... You have a 9 3/4 straight just before the switch that comes into the yard. Pull that and swap it to the left where it comes off the main. This will move the yard to the right a bit and most importantly UP away from the river bank. That would give you room to put 'something' in that area between the bottom yard track and the river bank that could be serviced by the bottom yard track/spur. One of the advantages of Unitrack...you can try different things and if they dont work...move it all back ;-) Like I say...just my .02
Noah; As a northern California person I ask, is the location you want closer to the coast or in the upper Sacto valley or southern cascades? Lumber could be in all and also agricultural shipping if in the valley. Even a small intermodel yard most likely would be found in the valley than in the mountains. When I started my layout I was not sure what I wanted so i went and looked for a location in the US that would let me have what I decided on. That was in the west of Texas. As I would need very few trees compared to modeling the California Northern and a UP interchange and I could have a small TOFC and container well car yard. My yard is not much bigger then yours as it is just for sorting arrivals and departing cars before they go to the many industries or out to the interchange or staging. I took about a year of thinking and planing before starting and then about an other year of scrapping and revising plans until I came up with my current one. Also use nothing less then 11" curves. Other wise you will be limited as to what engines and cars you can use. Like George, just my .02 worth.
Not sure where you see a 9 3/4" straight? There is the straight that comes off of the bridge on the inner main; this used to have the switch right up against the bridge. It was changed to eliminate an S turn. Also, I've already drilled and dropped all feeders (soldered to rails of every piece of Unitrack) and attached them to the bus, so I really don't want to change it now :droll: lol
I was going by this pic: It was to the right of the switch between the 2 locomotives on the yard lead But I looks like its alreadfy been moved. ;-)
The layout is freelanced. I refer to Northern California river/coastal areas because I want my terrain to have that feel. I've previously noted it might be a place like Dillon Beach or Bodega Bay, that has green rolling hills and agriculture land. Bodega also has the Russian River. Being such a green horn beginner, I didn't want to constrain myself with a prototypical layout. There's already a ton to learn as is! The narrowest loop of track on the right side of the layout is an 11" radius (narrower than I'd like), the middle is 12 3/8" and the outer is 13 3/4." On the left hand side, the curves are 12 3/8" and 13 3/4" with 7 5/16" straights to broaden the curves. I've been told I worked rather quickly on this, but believe me, I have done a ton of planning and research in the past four months since I started. I've already had several track revisions. So rather than revising and re-revising and re-re-revising the layout, I'd rather move forward from here. I feel I'm at a good enough place to work from. I'll steadily work and finish it out while continuing to learn. Even so, I still have plenty to do and plenty of entertainment left in the project! After this one is complete, I may focus on building up some locomotive and rolling stock inventory -after deciding which era I'd like to model next. In a two years, we plan to rent out this townhouse, and purchase a house. I figure I will build a larger, prototypical layout in that place. I appreciate your guys' combined four cents
Ahh yeah George, I think that was right after I had rebuilt my bench work. I previously had a heavy 2x4" frame. I accidentally put that straight in the wrong place :funny: I remember thinking "I knew that area was tight, but I didn't think it was that tight!"
You have stated your main purpose for the layout and I think you've met them: 2 continuous mainlines with decent-sized curves and a working yard on a 40" x 84" space. Now you also want to somehow get another 40"x 84" of realistic scenery in the same space. And you are adamantly opposed to changing any of the track geometry. Those are impossible goals to achieve simultaneously. One or more of them will get short-changed and leave you dissatisfied. Obviously your main interest in this layout is to run operations, not make a photo-perfect railroad scene. Rather than tie yourself (and the rest of us) into knots trying to cram 20 pounds of railroading into a 5 pound sack, build and run your operations-oriented layout as is. It's not a sin to imagine a giant grain elevator or large fruit packing house alongside spurs that have no room for them. What you're interested in is moving the cars around to real industry schedules, and run through trains to pick up and drop off those cars to a yard. So do that and forget trying to make it "look real". This is just your first layout. It may turn out that after running two trains continuously for X amount of hours/days/weeks you get tired or bored of that (and I've seen that happen with people) and want to look into single-track operations with meets and engine changes. Or switching doesn't do it for you that much, so decide mainline running with yards only to pick up and drop off long blocks of cars is the thing. Don't have to try "everything" on your first layout. This is advice for every modeler. You'll find it more satisfying to try out only one or two concepts on each of your early layouts, then keeping the ones you like to add to the next layout, thus building enjoyable layers to your model railroading experiences.
How in the world could you have a “Pointless yard”? I mean; it has switches right!? And switches have points, right? Having a “Pointless yard” would be akin to having a Frogless yard and who would want a yard without frogs? They eat insects and snails and they make soothing noises at night. . .Me thinks I have lost the point of this topic.
I suppose I [respectfully] disagree that my goals of using this track plan, with decent scenery and operations are impossible to have simultaneously. Rather than view it as one of scenery or industries getting "short-changed," I view it as efficiently balancing the built and natural environments with the space available. I agree there is no way I will have four substantial industries and a bustling commerce district, all nestled in a beautiful valley with rolling foothills and flourishing delta. What I ultimately picture, and think is attainable: -The existing track plan -Two small industries: lumber yard and train repair facility -The existing river/bay (with the bay cut down a bit to make room for the lumber yard) -The existing foothills, but finished out -A few more small undulations/depressions in the terrain -A painted backdrop that visually extends the foothills -Roadside gas station, cafe, and/or small motel -The small wharf I have planned for the front of the bay Like I said, for me it's about creating a balance between these various aspects of model railroading, all while having fun and gaining experience. I still appreciate all the input and advice! Noah
To give you an idea, here is a design I'd worked on (and received help on) a little while back: Here is a layout I found a while back that is randomly similar to mine. This person seems to have done a pretty good job of balancing industry and scenery on a roughly 40x80" layout. I think mine will have a little less scenery, and more built environment.
Not quite. I see a single track main, no yard at all, and two very demure industries. The concept and purpose of that layout are obviously very different from yours. It is much more scenery-heavy than track/industry, with the builder trying for a "train gliding through nature" look.
"Give purpose to my pointless yard" now that I have glued down and wired in the track is not as easy as it sounds. The trackage you call your yard is in fact a yard by design and would be best utilized as such. The key to any layout is to work within the scenic aspect ratio defined by the size of the layout. This is a basic rule of thumb for all scale modeling and is inherent in selective compression. Given the overall size of your layout an appropriate sized industry would use one spur track or at the most two spur tracks. The use of a larger industry or more than two spur tracks creates an exaggerated scenic aspect ratio. In your case this is where scenic view blocks may be useful, such as bridges, buildings, hills or trees. You have been offered many suggestions and modeling ideas to help boost your creativity. Don't hesitate to try out some mock ups, then take a step back to evaluate the visual effects. It's your model railroad and whatever makes you happy is all that counts. Jerry
My point was the close similarity in bridge and water feature which are in nearly the exact same location; on a similar hcd-size layout; with heavy scenery and some small industry. What I was getting at with this example was how much he was able to fit in a roughly HCD size layout. Of course, I'll have less scenery/railfanning, and slightly more operations/industries. The guy's layout [obviously] isn't exactly what I'm looking to do, but I think his turned out very well for its size. The track isn't glued yet. It is wired, but I could change the route if I felt the modification were worth it. As I said, I'd just really prefer not to...again. :crying: My request for help was for suggestions as to what industries would be appropriate and work with the given space constraints. Or, how to create more space (ie adding some foam back on the inlet creating more land next to the yard). I do read and consider all the feedback that I get. Most of the time it's very informative and I always appreciate the help. As you said "do whatever makes you happy." Well, I feel like I'm pretty happy with the way the layout is turning out, considering it's the first layout I've done. However, I'll still continue to research and seek help to continually improve the direction of this project.
As the old saying goes it is your railroad, and you are the CEO, majority stockholder, and own all the land around it on either side as far as the eye can see. And there are a number of old geezers, and semi geezers here that have built a number of layouts learning more in each one built that can offer advice. However everyone has their particular vision that may not work for you. The first layout, even a module, is a learning tool that helps with everything from scenery, to wiring and ballasting track. If it becomes a burden, or frustration and you find yourself trying to satisfy other folks ideas and concepts then it stops becoming a hobby and a relaxation and becomes the earlier mentioned things. Probably the key things are having a storyline, or reason the railroad exists whether fictional or real, and whether you design your own track plan or use one designed by someone else. Then setting an era which will determine motive power, type of cars, and structures, plus the type of industries that existed at the time. What I call semi freelancing can let one sort of combine eras where an industry that may have long since closed is still operating, or older diesels or steam still are running off the miles alongside the newer stuff. A little research on the geographic area can reveal the types of crops and other materials manufactured or mined in the area and can again help with the type of structures and again freight cars that would have a reason to be there. Half the fun can come from researching your railroad and the area for the history and stories, and a lot of communities now have web sites with old photos and stories. Having a track plan and knowing the available space can help in choosing structures that will fit the space. Something like a sawmill did not always have a log pond or a sawdust/chip burner both of which can take up some real estate on a layout. A cold deck with a crawler crane replaces the log pond. A wood chip storage bin and car loader replaces the big sawdust burner. And if you still want that big structure but it won't fit, then lay out the parts and figure out where 10 or 15 feet can be removed from the walls and roof to create the smaller version that will fit. Another part of the hobby in kit bashing and scratch building that can be fun. Over the years I have come to the old adage that less is often more. Several very detailed structures and scenes can add far more to a layout than a whole bunch of crowded areas. Again it is your railroad. Enjoy and have fun. It has helped me deal with a lot of stresses over the years by diverting me to a demanding art.
Something you might consider is putting a run-a-round within the yard. Counting outward from the “Big Industry” would there be any chance of installing a crossover between tracks three and four so the switcher could get in front of a couple of cars so as to push them back to the industry on the yard/spur track. I wouldn’t create that second tunnel on the lower left. Leave it as a cut. It will not only look better but provide easier access to your trains; in fact I’d go so far as opening up the tunnel you have back from the river to just that side of the highway. I had several “Hills” on my layout that I eventually ripped out and replaced with an abundance of trees and bushes of varying heights which served the same purpose, view blocks, but gave more color and life to those regions. Sense you have a wharf I’ll assume your RR is either on a coastline or along a navigable river or lake. That being said you might use that lower right hand industry spur for a car-ferry apron. This would allow you to interchange cars on and off the layout. You might want to include a short spur running off the table, perhaps in the upper right corner, as a second interchange making your RR a bridge between the car-ferry and a Class 1 RR.
John- your narrative was worthy of a page in Model Railroader. You did a great job of simplifying the most important aspects of model railroading. Just when I begin to feel that I'm doing pretty good for a beginner, a few harsh comments from experienced guys on the forum will instantly put the brakes on your party. I try to not let such feedback get to me, because for one, I'm old and mature enough, and two, I know that my expectations are just different than theirs. I appreciate your kind words and reinforcing my belief in why I decided to get into the hobby in the first place SD90- I do have a yard with the runaround (see image below). I get that you said within the yard, but that seems like it'd be a really tight squeeze. If you have AnyRail or CAD, perhaps draw your idea. I'm curios what you have in mind. I agree with you and am not going to do the second tunnel on the lower left section. It may not even be a cut -heck, it may even be a levee, or just more trees. You mentioning getting rid of hills in favor of trees and such to use as view blocks, is good advice. I do see myself doing the same thing with my layout. Your assumption is correct in that my RR is on the coast or navigable river -I've kinda envision that it's a river dumping into an inlet along the Northern California Coast (where I grown up). The ferry would be very cool, but I don't see how I could drop the tracks down far enough (in the short space) to come close to the top of the barge. I also like your idea for the second interchange at the top of the layout. Thanks fellas! Noah
