I am anxious to get started, but before I do I want to make sure that I haven't overlooked anything. Advice is welcomed! I like to watch trains roll and not too overly concerned about switching operations. Here are some givens and druthers: [FONT="]Givens and Druthers[/FONT] Northfield & Wichita (Fictional) [FONT="]Scale: N Gauge: Standard[/FONT] [FONT="]Era: Transition from steam to diesel[/FONT] [FONT="]Region: Possible midwestern farming[/FONT] [FONT="]Space: 8’ x 5’ L-shaped; height will be approximately 45”[/FONT] [FONT="]Space is in a small, spare bedroom 8’ along one wall and 5’ down the adjoining wall. Layout occupies a corner of the room. The 5’ section of the L is limited to that space because of the door into the room swings open to that wall.[/FONT] [FONT="]Governing Rolling Stock: Undecided as of yet[/FONT] [FONT="]Relative Emphasis:[/FONT] [FONT="]|______________________V_______________________| [/FONT] [FONT="]Track/Operation [/FONT] [FONT="]|_________________________________________V____|[/FONT] [FONT="]Mainline Running[/FONT] [FONT="]|____________________________________V_________|[/FONT] [FONT="]Scenic realism[/FONT] [FONT="]|____________V_________________________________|[/FONT] [FONT="]Switching[/FONT] [FONT="]Operation Priorities:[/FONT] [FONT="]Long Freight Train Operations[/FONT] [FONT="]Main-Line Passenger Train Operation[/FONT] [FONT="]Local Freight Operations[/FONT] [FONT="]Typical operating Crew: __1___ Eye Level (Owner) _55_In. [/FONT] [FONT="]Here is the plan: Suggestions will be appreciated. Thanks. [/FONT]
Personally, at first glance I like it.:thumbs_up: I do not see any major issues with it at least at first glance. Always wait for multiple opinions though.:teeth: How many trains are you planning on running? How you described it I could see a grain elevator providing grain to hoppers that then in turn delivered them to a food processing plant at another siding. Then loading the finished goods into boxcars and delivering them to the general store. One thing that I might recommend is possibly lowering the height of the layout so that way you can sit down and run it rather than always having to stand. No biggy though, just personal preference. My layout is 36 1/2" off the ground for the lower level track and my eyes are about 64" off the ground when standing. When I stand up I am towering over the layout but seated in a chair the lower level is about 10" + or - below my eye level. The top level track is approximately 3" higher than the bottom. Just my ideas... Mr X
I would eliminate the road running across the middle, thus isolating the back tracks from the rest of the scene and using that for scenery that creates a sense of openness for your farm vistas. I would define the reason for the three tracks in the back. You didn't mention needing a passing siding for two train operation. If you eliminate the two extra tracks you can put a little curve in that track which will look nice as the train runs through it. On the lower right "L" you have a switch on the very left hand side that looks like it would be better being a right hand rather than a left hand turnout. You'd have to see if you can make that work, but you have an S curve there now. I'd consider using a left hand turnout for the switch above the lake leading to the double track siding on the left. Use the straight portion for your siding and the curved portion to reduce the twisties on the run-around track. Would you think of a small elevation change in your Wichita layout? I think raising the back of the layout about an inch or so will make it scenically more interesting. Having a large grain elevator complex around the left side double track siding could create a bit of a view block as well, where the train (or part of it) disappears from view for a bit. Let us know if you make any revisions.
plan revision One thing I have decided to do and that is to move forward more to the modern era. I think that this will give me more selection for motive power and rolling stock. In addition, I think that it will afford me the opportunity to try to my hand at custom work. Mr. X: I am going with the scenario of grain elevator, milling operation, passing through farmland, etc. Thanks for your input. Mark Smith: Thanks for spotting the turnout issues. Works much better now. The reason for the pass through yard was for some storage, but for now it won't be necessary. I can see that issue resolved in a possible future expansion. I like the idea of curving the track at the top as it possibly passes through farmland. I have a picture in my mind of different elevations and this weekend I am going to experiment with RTS's 3D feature and see what I come up with. For now here is the revised plan: Thanks again for the input.
Honnestly I would really put the yard back. Just my opinion... I did however like the idea of having a slight grade to the track. Perhaps a variation of a half inch or an inch would work. Mr X
I'd rework your street. It could be State Highway ## with some trucks & customers for your industries. A section could have some commercial or residential structures. The building height could serve as part of a view block. I'd use it to "connect" #1 with #3, then a park road leading to the lake. You may work in a creek into the lake & extend it closer to the edge. It may make a nice park for trainwatching/boating/fishing. Work in a bridge or culvert. I've seen many grain elevators in the Midwest where the road curves sharply around it. A siding provides some space for loading. At the point where the L meets the top piece, see if you can add an angle piece? Something that can be used for a control stand & location for your throttle supply? From there you appear to be able to reach all turnouts? Then you could do manual turnouts & switching?
Much smoother looking. (The following comment is based on the assumption that the long side of the layout is against a wall.) With regard to the 'yard' perhaps building up the area near Red Wing Milling would be a better place. You have room on the main for another turnout and could fit a couple of tracks in there. The advantage of that location is that it is already industrial and that it is easily accessible from the edge of the layout. The accessibility fact would have been one I would have pointed out if you had mentioned that the original tracks were meant to be a yard. Keep them close to the side you can access and you won't have to worry about reaching over scenery to add or remove cars. (Obviously if the long side is open to the room, you'll want to put your yard tracks on the side.) Any elevation you add would look best to the 'rear' of the layout. So if the long side is against a wall, that's the side to put the elevation on.
Curious about something ... and I am not sure how hard it would be to do it in the current design or to change the design in the program. But try to visualize that the layout is more elevated toward the back which I believe would make it look larger and also be more interesting than a flat surface. Although the plains are pretty flat they do not have to be level. Could you possibly flip the entries to the sidings some how to have them be accessed from the track most near the wall to the north? Then place a small yard as in the original idea some where towards the front? I would really like to see if you could have a small yard (for at least some cars) and still have the industry spurs that you have drawn up. I think you will be more happy with it as time goes by is these features were included. Mr X
additional replies Thanks for the additional replies. I don't have time right now, but will work on these ideas over the weekend and post any new changes.
Might want to measure the distance to the back of the corner curve. That would be quite the stretch if there was a derailment. I suggest a hatch back there. Over all looks good. Yard vs long sweeping curve - hard call. Can you do mobil staging off the bottom right?
Poppy: I was impressed by the original plan you posted and the great description of your givens and druthers. I like the changes you've made to the original (curving main and scenery--yea!) and I agree with Glenn about a state highway connecting Industries 1 and 3 and his other suggestions. You said your eye level was 55" and I know mine is 65" so I'm assuming you're a little shorter than me...This might mean reaching 24" to 30" to the back of the shelf for the turnouts on the right hand edge of the layout could be an uncomfortable stretch. If such a reach is indeed an issue, then consider accessing Industry 3 from the same siding that serves the other industries. This would put all the turnouts within easy reach from the inside corner of the L...and you wouldn't even need to leave the control panel/throttle shelf Glenn suggested (except when you want to switch that expansion turnout and an expansion yard).
revision 3 of the plan I've made some revisions based on the member's here. I added a turnout on the right main in order to add a couple of more tracks for storage. In addition, I have angled the benchwork and don't think I will have too much of an issue with reach. I moved the lake inside of the tracks on the left. It will have a hiking trail around it so if you want to stop and watch switching operations at the silos or on the other side just to watch the train roll by, maybe a little fishing while you are at it. The County Planning Commission is still working on the details for roadways. As always, comments and suggestions welcome.
In your RR world, when ADM added the extra silos (and the 2nd track?) did they also have to encroach on the lake a little when they filled in to get a level area next to their buildings for the 2nd track? If they did, I wonder if the edge of the lake would have been straight, or if ADM was being environmentally correct and had a natural falling away to the lake's edge, maybe with some cattails. If ADM puts up a fence to keep fishermen and hikers from wandering onto the tracks, be sure the fencing crew coordinates with the county commissioner to put it down closer to the elevation of the lake, so the top rail of the chainlink fence is lower than the ADM tracks. That way, any 0-5-0 action, coupling or uncoupling of cars, or track maintenance/ cleaning actions will be possible without tearing out the chainlink fence.:teeth:
Plan #3 :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: I'd add a small trestle to the far left-hand curve for 2/3rds of the curve... nothing much, just 6-15 scale feet high. You can lower that portion of the scenery to keep the track level instead of having to raise anything. That would also provide a valley for your river/stream. If you plan to raise the back an inch or so, as suggested (I personally wouldn't) that could be your transition.
3rd plan :thumbs_up: :thumbs_up: I now agree with N_S_L's comment about keeping the track at one elevation and lowering only a portion here and there for a water feature.
Poppy: mg: Yard in, yard out. Elevation, no elevation. Gentle visible curve, view block. 30" reach is ok, reach is too long. You've certainly got a wide variety of options to consider...and all of them valid for the individual modeler that proposed them. As your plan has evolved, you seem to have settled on (at least at this moment:teeth: ): yard in back of the shelf is out, but storage is in; gentle curve is in; 30" reach is ok. Let me throw something else into the mix: Some modelers, even on smaller layouts, only want their trains to be visible when running in one direction through a scene...so an eastbound train progresses from left to right or westbound from right to left, but is not visibly moving in both directions through the same 30" deep scene. For a layout plan like yours with a loop: 1. These modelers would hide much of the back half of the loop so trains are only visible when they travel in one direction across the front of the loop. 2. They might opt for "hidden" staging and storage, usually with a double-ended yard (like in your original plan rather than the stub-ended storage of your most recent plan) that allows trains to be stored "off-stage" until they make their run, with the choice of going either eastbound or westbound around the loop. They might opt to hide the staging area with hills and trees, or with easily removable viewblocks, buildings, or tunnels. 3. On small loops, they might run around several times, switching Industry 1 the first loop, Industry 2 on the 3rd, Industry 3 on the 5th, etc. Even though their train is traveling through the same scene more than once, it is still going the same direction so the operator has a sense that the trains are really going someplace that is "distant" from their starting point. Other modelers prefer seeing their trains most or all of the time, especially on smaller layouts, and they are quite comfortable running through the same scene in two directions. They achieve a sense of distance between tracks at the front of the shelf and visble tracks at the back by partial viewblocks, hills/trees/buildings, and other scenery tricks: 1. They may put highly detailed scenes in the front and back but separate them with areas in the middle that have very few details and maybe even less bold colors and more uniform textures so the eye is not led too easily from one detailed scene directly to the other. 2. The separation can also be achieved by small changes in track elevations. 3. They may use the super-detailed trees from Woodland Scenics or Heki at the front of the layout, but lichen and ground foam at the back. Or trees of one shade in one area, but of a different shade in another. 4. They might use color "families" like reds, browns, oranges, yellows to subtly shade or weather objects in one area, and use blues, greens, and grays to shade or weather objects in another area, 5. They may physically separate the areas with walls, roads, streams, etc. 6. One area may be urban, the other rural; one industrial, the other residential; one flat with few trees, the other hills and forest. Lots to consider...ENJOY!
I like your revised plan. I'd make the elevator as big as possible with as many silos as possible since I've got a covered hopper addiction and that's my solution to feed it. As far as different levels of track, I agree with you doing that. I read that article in Model Railroader titled "How flat falls flat" and agree that small elevation changes bring interest to the plan. I personally plan on using Z scale cork for my mainline on my shortline and having the sidings mounted directly to the foam or homasote. The class one railroad will run on N scale cork since they're usually ballasted better than the shortlines. All of these items combine for visual interst. Having the sidings lower also mimicks the prototype. Enough about what I'm doing though--I like your plan and my only other suggestions would be to place trees on both sides of the tracks in different locations so the trains roll "through" the layout and not "around" the layout. You might also consider extending the lake down to the left and make another low bridge as already suggested. Good luck!
Thanks to all! Thanks to everyone for the input, advice and ideas. It's going to be fun to get started. My first project though will be cleaning the room and rearranging things, then on to the benchwork and laying of track. As soon as that is done, then I'll start applying some of the advice and ideas given here. The fun part is that it never ends and you can always stay busy applying new techniques and incorporating ideas from others. As soon as the project starts in earnest I will begin to post photos of the progress. Again, thanks to everyone!
For repayment of all the advice given, all we ask is: please post pictures of your progress!!! :shade:
