Hello all, New time poster and "too long out of the hobby" member. I just realized a few weeks ago that after 10+ years of being out on my own that I now have my own basement and area to do whatever I want with! So behold, the plan. First, however, I want to note that I did some research and visited some local hobby shops to realize the amazement in modern modeling and evolution of quality throughout the scales. I am amazed at the level of detail along with the small cost to achieve that detail (relative to 10 years ago) has become. Excited to be reintroducing myself to the hobby at this time. Back in my childhood/teen years, I modeled in HO but I must say that N scale has won me over. None of the qualms that I had with N scale persist today in regards to operation and lack of features. So with that said, after much debate and planning in HO the plan I have below is in N scale. I would like to get general feedback to what must be the 12th rendition of the track plan below. There are 2 levels connected by a helix. The top is prairie/city scape and the bottom mountain/port scape. The industries don't really matter but I like color and variation of rolling stock so I tried to work in a variety. The key of this entire track plan is variety as I don't want to do something more than once (this includes track design/operation). The space I have is along a full wall in the basement and I occupied a small space (bottom plan) beside the TV that is really just dead space. On the top is the main staging area where any power boxes etc will be located. My time line on this build is 2 years (or more) starting this fall. I'll build the bench work this summer with the deck but in general I have some time. The bench work will be module. Now that I have bored everyone off the thread here is the top Prairie plan (upper level): The long space is just over 16" x 18' (w x h) while the small part on the bottom is 3' x 27" and the top ~ 3-1/2' x 7' inclusive. There is a switch to the mainline between (2) and (3) that will be used only in continuous operation mode/for passenger trains. In general, the track to the Warehouse should be considered it's own spur at the end of the line. I just folded it over to utilize the space and also model what we might find on the outskirts of a large city. The yard is obvious but some of the details may not be. The angle track right next to the roundhouse is the caboose track. The far left spurs of the yard are the MoW (bottom part) and RIP/Wreak (top part) tracks. There are two switching groups one with 2 tracks and the other with 3. They have their own runaround leads while sharing the West/East In/Outbound switching lead (located on the right of (2)). Passenger terminal and passing track is on the far right-bottom of the yard. The city scape at (1) is not meant to be a Timesaver but an interesting condensed city industry lead. Not sure if this is realistic or the operation is usable - I think it is when I play with it. Right on (1) is a tractor manufacturing plant where they assemble them right on the flatcar. In on the right (empty) - tractors (full) out on the left. Now the Mountain plan (lower level): Pretty self explanatory. The mine at (3) is actually in a valley with a large trestle on the mainline. In reality the mine yard would be operated on grade without power but in this case a switcher will be housed at that small spur there on the left of the outbound yard. The far left 2 tracks on the outbound yard are used for runaround and incoming empties. The same power then runs the other direction with the fulls after dropping the empties in the inbound yard. The mine is also on a spur and to model the distance plus get the power facing the right direction when it arrives we have the loop under the piers (6). At the piers I stuck a spur on the far left to either go to another pier or a pier-side industry. Not sure if there are other options or if the pier itself is realistic. The era on the entire plan will be somewhat modern. However, with that said, my plan is to model different industry clusters at various time frames. It will be done in such a way that it will look like either it's an old industry that is operating until it dies using an old diesel combo or somewhat upgraded just enough to remain viable. I will have one steamer running a vintage passenger service. The rest will be diesel. The only full 'modern' industry will be the containerized distribution warehouse - maybe the elevator too. So here it is - my ambitious plan. Please critique and provide insight/alternative. I've gone about as far as I can go on my own with books and mags. Really appreciate the feedback. Cheers.
Hi Matt, I love the basic design behind this!! The length you have to work with really gives it the feel of distance. I do see some spots that I think will kink the flow of traffic so I took the plan into Photoshop and drew some ideas in. First big suggestion is to make the mainline double all the way round. You were basically almost there except for two short bottle necks on the top level (I haven't evaluated the second level yet). I drew the mainline in red. Next, the yard structure seemed a bit complex. I re-laid the structure keeping all the tracks from before, but refined it down to 14 turnouts from 18. Having to travel less turnouts for any given route means easier access to all tracks (and less maintenance requirements). Lastly, with the new yard, I simplified the industrial area in the middle, again keeping every track but making it flow a little smoother. I cant read what the text says for the city scape, so I'm not sure what exactly your plans were there. However the tracks there were the very complicated. It took a few seconds for me to figure out how to get to any given track. In place of that, I re-drew an option that allows access from two directions (and a reverse loop if desired). You can now figure out how to access any given track with a simple glance.
Well there's an idea... stick 2 images on top of each other... get a bigger one. Thank you for your input! In my trek to make a city scape I think I got caught up in making it look complex rather than functionality. I took your yard input and city input and made something here a bit better I think: I took your advice and doubled the main all around the top level with a loop back on the bottom end. I ran the second main directly through where the old terminal/passing track was and connected it all up. I also changed the yard a bit as per your suggestion I think it works (and looks) much better. I relocated the passenger terminal to inside the city. This works great as I would like to actually model something that looks like a nice classic city passenger terminal. This also takes the passenger trains right off the right of way so there's no congestion worries. I simplified the industry spurs and provided a small run around. This looks much better than what I had. Thank you! I joined the switching lead to the mainline so it can be used as a passing/waiting track in a crunch. I didn't join it to the warehouse lead, however. The reason for this is that I want the warehouse to be on it's own spur as if it's further down the line and not against this particular yard (or one at all). So the train would loop around on the right main to move directly power first into the lead. The power would then uncouple and proceed out of the way into the service shop while the switcher places the the full cars. Once the lead is clear the power would come back out of the shop and onto the lead. The switcher would then assemble empties behind it for a trip back. I think this is the operation I want here and I know if I connect the switcher lead I will cheat I decided to keep the sulphur mound round as to not foul the main for loading/unloading. This will be a specialty train anyway so I don't think the tight radius will be a problem. I changed it a bit though. This whole area is flattened considerably now that a bridge is not needed to get over to the warehouse. This is much more prairie like. I look forward to your critique of the bottom and further on this new plan! Cheers.
First of all, welscome to Trainboard. My wife's from Calgary and wqe try and make it up every 5 years or so so maybe we could meet up next time we're in town. My father in law is a big O scaler up there and has a massive layout as well. I like your plan. It seems to have alot of operations potential. As you've said it's a pretty ambitious plan so my only worry would be the time/effort/money to build the thing. I've got a 10x17 space I'm going to start working with soon and have found as I've re-worked my plan that I'm leaning towards "less is more". I want to complete the layout in a short period of time so I can enjoy it before I retire. So my only suggestion is make sure this won't be too much to bite off. It'll definately be one heck of an N scale layout once you get some trains running. As far as the layout plan itself. There's quite a long reach to the back left corner of the yard. Unless that's accessable from both sides, you might have some problems there. You ought to look up Grant Eastman. He's in Calgary and he's a nice guy and N scaler. Maybe he could give you some advice. Here's his web page: Southern Alberta Rail (sar) - Home Good luck with the layout. Looking forward to your progress.
Great job with the revision Matt. I want to say one thing as you've pointed out twice that you have tried to make things "complex" for a reason. In my experience, many people pursue this look. Unfortunately, in the end those "complex" features end up being the unused and avoided features after the novelty wears off. When brainstorming ideas of a design, its easy to overlook the amount of work involved in just moving a car from one spur to another. Sure, in general terms it is a simple move, but when it's a necessary move, that's all the complexity you need right there. Adding unnecessary complexity, such as making the destination spur reversed, and after a switch back will quickly raise the cost required to get there. Sooner or later, you'll just stop delivering there all together. Dont eliminate ways to cheat, its best to add them. Anyways, here are more specific suggestions: Area 1 is much improved, with the exception of that little crossover arrangement. I removed it and arranged the turnouts for better access to the inner loop. To keep your desire to have the yard and industries along the long side separated, I thing it would be better served if you flip the stubs. This way the train can back in and the locomotives are able to break away and pull forward into the service track. Before, they had to pull head in then shove the cars back to separate and allow the switcher to step in and then pull forward again. This new way kills the first two moves with one stone. Other than that, your revised design on the top level pretty much has all it needs. Oh, I forgot, you might be able to eliminate the crossover I put the black dot over. It does not provide direct access to anything and another crossover opportunity is just a few feet away (the double crossover). Saves you 2 turnouts.
Welcome to Trainboard, Matt! I like the idea of using the helix to move between the two decks, but maintenance will be a nightmare if you aren't able to stand up inside the helix. The cityscape trackage in your original plan or Mark's variation will create a permanent roof over your helix opening that prevents you from standing inside the helix...so any maintenance on the upper left portion of each helix loop (8:00 to 1:00; northwest quadrant) will have to be done by reaching from the front of the shelf or the right hand side (if there is not a wall there), or by crouching under the lower level and reaching up to the top loops of the helix. Even if you have no backdrop on the lower level hiding the helix, you will still have to bend under the upper deck to reach the outside of each loop...and, depending on how you are supporting the upper deck, access to the outside of the second highest loop may be severely limited. Another concern with the plans relates to clearance between the underside of the top deck and the railheads of the top loop of helix track as it passes under any of the cityscape tracks. Depending on how steep your grade is within the helix and how thick the upper deck is that supports the city tracks, you may have to start the track descending a foot or so before it enters the helix structure itself so that, by the time the helix track must pass under the city track, it will have about 2 inches of clearance with the underside of the material supporting the city track. (By the way, whatever arrangement you settle on for the city tracks, you should have a run-around track located within the city area so that you can bring set-outs from the yard to the city area and work the city tracks, then take the pick-ups back to the yard. Putting the run-around in the city area rather than along the main by the yard, will let you stay in the city area to do all of the switching moves, making it seem like the city area is farther away from the yard.) If you are set on keeping a plan that uses a double-tracked stacked helix to pass between the 2 decks, you can make the stacked helix option more workable by shifting its position about 6 or 9 inches to the left and run all city tracks outside of the helix instead of over it, so that you have an open area to stand in to perform helix maintenance. Passenger track/continuous running: If you also shift the passenger station to the outside of the main as it passes to the back of the layout shelf before curving across the back of the shelf to go down the helix, you would still be able to maintain your continuous run option by looping a track around the outside of the helix to connect with the main track that serves the city tracks. This proposed relocation of the passenger station/track makes the hard-to-see and hard-to-reach double crossover unnecessary. You would also be able to have continuous running between the 2 decks. Assuming the passenger station/track is relocated and tied into the city area tracks by looping around the helix, and if the top of the city area siding started where Mark's most recent plan shows the Black Dotted crossover, and if the bottom (southern end?) of the city area siding tied back into the main with a right handed crossover above (north of?) the #7 Elevator turnout, then the continuous running loop that Mark shows in purple going around the #8 Sulphur mound would not be needed. On the lower level, your plan shows the return loop positioned under the port sidings on the 36x27 inch shelf. For ease of maintenance (and construction!) reposition the tracks so there is never any track permanently hidden under other track. If you shift the town up (north), you could daylight all of the track by having the port on the lowest level, then, as the track goes south out of town, it curls into the lower left corner, climbing as it curves around the right end of the 36x27" section and then crosses over itself to pass behind some trees and buildings and the entire town. It reappears north of the town at the back of the shelf while the lower tracks heading south into town are at the front of the shelf. You could also round out the inside corner onto the 27"x36"section and have the lower track loop across the FRONT of the 27x36" piece and climb clockwise around the 27x36" section to the back part of the layout instead of having it cross under the upper track and toward the lower left corner to circle counter-clockwise around the 27x36" section. The mine would also be repostioned north (some of it even all the way around the corner) so it is in front of the helix in the same way the city tracks are all positioned in front of the (repositioned) helix. Just before getting to the mine, the main would pass over the track that heads out of the helix toward the port. After passing above the track to the port, the main could pass behind the mine and mine tracks (but still in front of the helix) and enter the helix at the right side of the layout on the second (or third) loop of the helix. If you are willing to look at other helix options that take a little more floor space but dramatically improve ease of construction and maintenance, I would like to propose a bowl-shaped helix option. Take a look at pictures of bowl-shaped helixes in My Albums linked in my signature below, and look at the entries in My Blog to learn why I developed a bowl-shaped helix design instead of using the traditional stacked helix, and to see how I constructed my bowl-shaped helixes. You currently have a stacked helix that takes up about a 3'8" x 3'8" space, and, if you make the minimum changes necessary to allow you to stand up inside the helix, it will take about 4'x4'6". (If windows or doors along the right side of the layout plan prevent you from extending the shelf beyond 3'8", you could keep that dimension along the wall, and have a slight bulge that starts away from the wall.) There is a spreadsheet for calculating dimensions of bowl-shaped helixes stickied at the top of the Layout Design Forum home page. If you enter the width of the ramp, minimum radius you want in the helix, and the maximum grade you want through the helix, the program will calculate how much each loop must rise from one support to the next and will determine how many loops are needed to rise the desired distance between the lower and upper decks. It will also calculate the size of the footprint. When considering footprint size, be sure to add in how many tracks will be passing behind and in front of the helix. For all practical purposes, the minimum radius for an N-scale bowl-shaped helix is about 15.5 inches for a 1/2 inch subroadbed to support the track and a maximum of 2% grade.
Thank you very much! If you are ever in town let me know and we'll go for some coffee and talk trains... I'm sure the wife would love me talking to someone else about it anyway. It is an ambitious plan and I do intend to spend several years building it. To start, I want to work on laying the track/base for the yard, the main, the port, and the sulpur mound over the first year. Everything else will be added in stages as I see the interest and get motivated. I really want to spend the time choosing the right buildings, scenery, and detailing the landscape. By the end of this summer I am going to try and get the workbench built up and we'll go from there. Cost is not an issue at this juncture as I have everything budgeted. I already know I will not be able to build everything at once but my budget allows for a healthy and steady progression. Add to that I am very patient so I can wait for that next segment You are correct the end of the yard is a long reach even on a stool. I intent to stick a leaning area next to that 45 corner on the bench but I am hoping I will not have very many derailments on that back corner much or intend use the far spurs for uncoupling small consists or the like. I might stick in some electromagnetic decouplers but you are right it may pose a problem... working out how to best use that area - I hate dead space. Thank you very much for the link! I did check out Grant's website and intend to contact him and ask some questions. His scenery and detail is exactly what I am looking for. Thanks again, Cheers!
You are absolutely correct! Now that I think about it, I should be adding more options not restricting myself. This allows me to do many different operations and however complex I want it to be at that time. I'm slowing getting with the program... What I tried to do here was give as long a length as i could for the industry... and I really want a track crossover ... not sure why I never had one before. But your design does look much better once again. I'll take a look here and see what fits. This design looks much better too... I'll play with it and see what I like. I forgot now that the bridge over the main is gone it's flat and I can extend the entire spurs right up... I have more space than I thought! I'm going to take your advice and connect the switching yard lead to the segment so I have more operational options there. You're right I can remove it... I think I just kept it because it was hanging around from when I connected the old terminal track to the main. If there's no reason for it to be there consider it gone! I have lots to look over here. This is much better than what I started with. Thanks again!
Wow lots of info on the helix! And a bunch about it I did not consider! I intended to stand up inside it when the helix was in HO... but when I went to N I narrowed the diameter and didn't even think about how I was going to access the back corner. The helix will be open on the right and bottom side... but the back quadrant is still hard to reach. Lots to look over in your post I'm going to take a look at your album and check out the option of moving the main a bit and designing the helix. That double crossover will be hard to see and possibly operate so that's definitely a concern I should look at. Thanks for the info! Will post some comments when I have some time to digest it.
Matt: Take a look at this...It's a variation on what I described the other day. The helix is bowl-shaped instead of stacked...so the radius is constantly increasing from 15.5" up to about 24 inches. The grade throughout the helix is 2% and I put in 6 loops to rise about 13 inches. When you decide on the final track plan, depth of the upper deck, thickness of the upper deck, and (very important!) preferred height of both the upper and lower decks, we can tweak the helix dimensions to optimize everything. I just noticed that I didn't draw in the passenger depot...it should be at about 5:00 on the outside of the helix. The Main curves counter clockwise as it rises up the helix, exits the helix at 12:00, bends down past 9:00 to about 7:00 where the Main splits to the city area siding on the right and to the passenger depot siding to the left (inside) at about 6:30. There are 4 or 5 industrial sidings extending from the city area siding to the left, and 5 industrial sidings extending to the right. The left arm of the Y from the city area siding to the Main by the Yard could be used as an industry siding or else as a continuous running connection. I added 3 staging tracks going across the top of the plan (hmmm...looks like I didn't get the third one fully connected into the city siding...there should be 3 turnouts at the top (north) end of the city siding: one for the main and 2 for the 3 staging tracks. If you want to include the staging tracks, you should probably adjust the order the switches are in so a passenger train can come from the staging tracks and still get into the passenger siding. I tried to arrange the turnouts so the longest reach was about 2 feet when standing outside of the helix. I flipped the yard so the yard lead goes along the back of the shelf instead of in front of the industries you put on the bottom half of the plan. This way you can extend it past the middle of the 18 foot shelf but hide it behind any of those industries, giving the impression that there is greater distance from the yard to those industries. How long is your turntable? In the drawings it looks about 7 inches, but that seems short to me. Do you have real estate rights to bulge out from 16 inches to about 20 or 22 inches, if you need to put in a longer turntable?
The scanned image of my track plan appears to be slightly distorted on my screen...everything looks like it's been squeezed in from the sides so the helix looks almost oval shaped. Does it appear distorted to others, or is the problem in my screen... It's supposed to be a perfect spiral or circle, not egg-shaped. ;-P , or did I eat too many Easter eggs yesterday?
