Jerry , I like what you have there but have to agree that too much yard tends to create too much clutter (as was my problem) i chose to remove some and go with more usable industries. Now that I have lower level staging I have no need to have trains parked on the upper level and I love that. IMHO Mike
I'm with you 100% Mike and you made a great choice considering your real estate options! Mock up #2 of the Eola Sub now has easily accessible staging for six 12' trains with scenic divider. This allowed me to reduce the number of yard tracks by 5 without sacrificing operations. Another mainline track was added to the yard and industrial LDE's to create the triple track prototype mainline and double as a siding for working the industries. Minimum radius curves were raised to 19" for most of the layout with one exception that will eventually be corrected. This is just a mock up to see how much room will be required to have what I want without destroying the overall visual aspect of the layout. The beauty of working with a modular bench work concept is that it can be easily adjusted and rearranged and custom sections can be created if necessary to fill in any gaps, such as the 3' X 3' section used for staging. [/URL][/IMG]
Thanks Mike. When it comes to operations and construction the one limiting factor is depth of reach. As a scene gains more horizontal space the ratio of depth space diminishes. That can be a blessing in some instances and a curse in others. The mock up plan contains the bare essential LDE's I desire for my layout. Keeping the suggestions everyone has made in mind I will proceed with real time mock ups for each LDE. The yard looks better; however the flour mill has similar issues. Unfortunately I need all the trackage for ops, so the scene demands more horizontal balance IMHO. There is still a lot of home work to be done and I am anxious play with all the ideas presented.
Here's where "artistic vs. realistic" comes into play: You are not including any commuter trains in your operations. That's an artistic choice. The real three-track "raceway" runs straight as an arrow from Chicago to Aurora (obviously you need curves on a layout, so not much you can do about that), and cuts at an angle through every town it runs. So if your town version really is "Downer's Grove", you have presented an "artistic" one That's as good a way as any to show the difference between the two styles. This is not a criticism, but a way to show you what I mean by the two styles. But I'm not really sure where the layout mainline "begins" or "ends" -- is the yard the beginning of the modeled segment, and the main goes east (west?) from there all the way around the layout and "ends" just before it re-enters the yard? Or is it some other scheme?
Backshop - no criticism taken. I will have a Metra train and a Superliner that is why staging is so important. I understand AP, the difference between prototype and my version of it. BTW the layout will be skewed and will run at an angle through Downers Grove with a prototype grade crossing. I may end up with a triple track main as well. At the moment I am stepping back from each LDE and trying to decide what it will take to create the spacial balance within the scene using prototype land marks. W Neal - May have to take you up on your offer. Real time visuals work better for me than photos / videos.
I'm too far away Jerry. But you are always welcome. Actually the 56 miles was greatly compressed. I suppose it is LDEs that have quite a bit of "country running" in between, much like your plan only with more room between towns. I do suggest visiting as many layouts as you can. Try to visit those that are trying to simulate real places and, when possible,compare them to the real thing. If you find yourself saying "Hey, this place looks like that layout", then you will gain insight. This is exactly what I did with the old MR project layouts. Thier theory worked for me. Both in the case of the BN and WC project layouts, enough "scenic" highlights were captured to very favorably capture the real places in N - compression or not. You may find that the locations on your layout come "alive" as you begin to model them.
In this mock up of the Eola Sub it received a prototype triple mainline. The industrial LDE now has the entire industrial park on the inside of the mainline as the prototype. The concrete plant was relocated to this LDE and now has a siding. The flour mill was shifted toward the Eola yard adding more balance to this LDE. The LDE between the intermodal facility and the flour mill has now been opened up for rural scenic running. The Town of Downers Grove is essentially urban scenic running with a depot. The chemical plant was enlarged and only a few sections of 15" radius curves remain on the mainlines. By balancing the open space on each side of the Harvest States Milling (just North of Chicago) flour mill helped to reduce the impact of its extensive trackage. At this point I am seeing some light at the end of the tunnel. [/URL][/IMG]
Puttin' a lot of work into designing this! I love it when a modeler becomes concerned about prototype stuff, such as specific towns and industries, how many track there are, etc. However, and please don't take this as nit-picking or a put-down of any sort, if you're so concerned about all this prototype stuff for your layout, how is it that you're not concerned about the appearance and limitations of Kato Unitrack? There's no way that it looks like any North American prototype trackage, you're limiting your minimum mainline radius because of it, not "photogenic" curves because it's nearly impossible to do with it, its code 80 rail is waaaay too high, the rail's cross section isn't like any real rail I've ever seen, there's all these sections, and I can go on and on. Wouldn't this be a much better, flowing design using ME #6's or Atlas 55 #7's, ME code 55 concrete tie flex (which I'm going to bet is prototypical) with its really wonderful weathered rail (not that shiny stuff that Kato Unitrack has) along with wooden tied turnouts all in code 55??? I assume you're going to be running prototype appearing trains on your layout too, with all the details and great paint that's currently available along with cars with lots of details and correct paint and loads?? Some of 'em will probably be properly weathered and graffiti-ized, but they're gonna run on track (Kato Unitrack) that will NEVER look nearly as good as either Atlas 55 or ME 55. The logic doesn't work for me. It seems extremely ironic. No explanations required. Just sayin' that after all this work, why not make it look as good as you can by using track products that are at least a close facsimile of the real deal? Cheerio! Bob Gilmore
I'm wondering why you have kept your track a foot away from the edge of the layout. Wouldn't putting it closer, say like 3", let you put in bigger curves on the ends? And as for depth of each section, I can see why you want a deep background for the industrial areas, but why for Downers Grove? That's an awful lot of area to fill up with only residential scenery. To change that up a little, you could widen the end curves just below DG and have them come slightly back inward (toward the center of the benchwork) instead of paralleling the edge of the layout. Then the slightly angled main can go through town, getting closer to the backdrop past DG and then, because they've moved to the right, the curved mains into the APL yard area can be larger. Right now, all your track parallels the edges and backdrops. Such designs constrain the look of the railroad and too easily come to resemble stereotypical "Lionel-style" layouts of geometric precision. If that's what you're shooting for, you've got it pretty well. I know you're using sectional track but you can make more organic, free-flowing trackwork with it. So you should think about whether or not you want all the elements in your model world - roads, tracks, buildings, industries, yards -- to all be aligned precisely in line with the edge of the benchwork and each other.
Bob - I already own all the Unitrak needed for the layout. I'm concerned with emulating the prototype from a logistics, operations, equipment and structures stand point and less so in terms of fine scenic details. Only a select few pieces of equipment will ever see weathering or add on details. I have yet to acquire basic scenicing skills. This is my reality check and I am good with that. Backshop - I repeat this is just a mock up design only. When it comes time to finalize the track plan I will post a thread in the layout design section and make all the corrections you have outlined and more. The point of this thread was to determine the desired amount of selective compression and find the balance between the depth and horizontal space as it applies to a large layout design. Everyone's thoughts are greatly appreciated and accepted as constructive criticism. Thanks for looking and sharing your ideas.
Well Jerry, it appears you have it under control. I like the concept and appreciate the effort you have put into the design. An idea came to me as I was working on my own designs and popped in to see how you were doing. There is one more 'tool' you might consider applying though I think it will confirm what you already know. For grins you may want to 'straight line' it. Draw up a diagram that dispatcher would have in the control room. It might give you one more perspective on your plans.
Great idea! The mock up was intentionally missing crossovers and possible siding(s) and they would need to be in place for this to be accurate. Most definitely! By not making it a part of the Eola yard made the yard fully functional, less dominating and added visual appeal. Best part is all staging lanes are longer and of equal length; which will simplify re-entry as any open lane can hold any train. The final design will hold all the LDEs regardless of the layout design (island or around the room). By getting the selective compression 'right' for each LDE went a long way in reaching the correct perspective when looking at the 'Big Picture'. Thanks to everyone for all their input!
So am I, unfortunately I have a few life hurdles to jump through before anything gets off the ground. One thing is certain I will be buying my new home with my model railroad in mind and now I have a pretty good idea of what that is.
High time for an update! I bought my ranch home with full basement in September 2014. Was diagnosed with cancer in January 2015. Had a major surgery to remove tumors and followed up with chemo therapy. Had another surgery to remove a tumor in September 2015 and am recovering from that currently. No additional chemo is needed and I am now cancer free! During this time I have been getting a few needed home projects done prior to starting my model railroad. I now have a 35 ft by 27 ft roughly 12 ft in width area that will make for a fine "L" shaped island designed layout with 4 ft aisles around it. The continuous running layout will have a scenic view block throughout the "L" design with a layout depth ranging from 1 to 2 feet. It will have a double track mainline with 100 ft of track per mainline. Primarily a modern switching layout with large and small industries, classification yard and an open staging / storage yard. The size of the layout has brought me to a point where I will need help in getting it up and running. With that in mind I will be starting a model railroad ministry through my church in order to bring in more help and at the same time encourage fellowship. I made sure when I bought my home that it also had a separate off street entrance and bathroom facilities for club activities and open house showings. Here are a few pics of the basement. Basement 1 by Jerry Tarvid posted Oct 6, 2015 at 10:46 PM Basement 2 by Jerry Tarvid posted Oct 6, 2015 at 10:46 PM Basement 3 by Jerry Tarvid posted Oct 6, 2015 at 10:46 PM Basement 4 by Jerry Tarvid posted Oct 6, 2015 at 10:46 PM Basement 5 by Jerry Tarvid posted Oct 6, 2015 at 10:46 PM Here is a pic of the basement and layout design. EolaSub005 by Jerry Tarvid posted Oct 6, 2015 at 11:07 PM
