All, I understand the height topic, and I have read many places, where there are "standards" for model trains...but I am also not trying to down talk this either. In the end, it is a hobby to me and my children. I understand that to many this is their life, and many have the ability to spend countless hours on their layouts. And their input is based on those countless hours, alongside with the challenges and lessons learned. For me, this layout is for three things only. Number one, time with my 15-year old son, and 8-year old daughter. It is very hard these days, to find something that I can do with them, together, based on their ages, age gap, and gender. Second reason, to bridge a gap on my grandfather's history in the railroad industry with my children. They never got to meet my grandfather, but my children have heard about him many times, and want to know more. See Frankfort where we live, was built around NKP. My grandfather being an engineer for NKP, and later for N&W, had many local people working with him. I, and my family, found this out more, after I had joined our local Masonic lodge. Many of my fellow Mason's, worked on the railroad, and many worked with and knew my grandfather. Lastly, my sanity! As mentioned, this will be in my home office, that unfortunately, I can spend 12-20 hours straight in, depending on the project I am working, or managing. So the height for me, is one that allows for objective number one to paramount. So that my children, can equally participate in the project, and as mentioned before, the other reason for the height that we will use, is the view that I see from sitting at my desk. I did not mean to start a huge debate over the benchwork, depth or height. With that being said, all inputs were considered and some discussed here at home, and others documented for future concepts and layouts. It is our first true layout, and again, I do appreciate the inputs here, and all viewpoints provided. To me, my larger concern is based on the earlier comments on the track layout logic that I had provided. After some recommendations, I altered the layout, and presented the revised version. I still have some concerns on the layout, based on some earlier input. Like the comment, "Simplify the back side. Maybe have some staging tracks back there, but not any real switching." For me, I guess I do not understand that completely. So some guidance, or better understanding on his would be great. As well as the train yard. I tried to incorporate the classification sorting area, rolling stock repair, caboose storage, and engine repair/parking. Also, the yard lead track leaving the yard on the curve, and its injection into the mainline. I guess...does the logic and flow of the layout ale sense, or is it off tilt by a few miles. Again, thank you to all for the input, and feedback! Scott Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Staging" refers to an area where you can park a train or trains before or after they enter the active part of the layout. Sort of like the wings of a theatrical stage. Say you make up a train in Frankfort, then want to send it somewhere down the line. Well, you don't have any other cities on the layout, but don't let that stop you. Send it to staging. Park it there for a while, then have it return, posing as a completely different train you have to break down and classify again. Staging provides a way to represent the rest of the world not modeled on your layout. Some people prefer "hidden" staging, a series of tracks that are out of sight while you're running the railroad. Others have visible staging, and scenic the area as the rest of the layout. I believe it was suggested for the backside of your layout because in most cases staging yards aren't switched. You simply pull a train in, let it sit for a while, and pull it out at the appropriate time. So you won't be fumbling around trying to uncouple cars that aren't within easy reach. Hope that answers your question. Jim
Jim, Thank you, that helps a lot. I will see what I can do with that thought, and post an update. Scott Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any reason not to consider double decking, though I don't know all the parameters of your layout space. Benefits of single deck, done faster; double deck benefits are a larger empire to rule over....lol. You have enough room for a helix and double decking. But I understand if you want to keep your layout to one deck.
After reading all the thoughts shared here I was just sure I was ready to jump in and add my two cents. So here goes. First off we all see things differently...lucky for us. Otherwise we'd all have the same style of layouts with the same trains running. Yuck! Truth is, you've been given some good advice and now it's time to sort it all out. Discovering what you want and then building it is the fun part of the planning. Just don't expect your first thought to be your last ones. I promise you're layout will evolve. Also, expect to fill your garbage can full of hand drawn layout designs. Just one of those things that happens. Height, depth, overall construction, choice of bench work are all relative. Do I dare say etc., ....! I would whole heartedly recommend you run down to the LHS and purchase a number of Kalmbach, How To books. Benchwork, wiring, scenery, how to build a prototype layout or realistic yards. I don't recommend messing with the A books. Unless you want to build a toy train layout. So, the best of luck and remember the number one rule...#1, Have Fun! If it turns into work it's no longer a hobby.
Right there with you Bob. I enjoy the work and effort it takes to build, troubleshoot and maintain my layout. I don't like locomotives that break down in less then 50 hours of operation but that's another story for a different date and time. Some after thoughts: Just because someone says, "It's new in the box", doesn't mean so. I haven't nor will I ever trust a seller that hands me a box and says "New in the Box". Not going to happen. Or they push a jewel box toward you and say, "Read the label on the box because what's in the box, is what the label says it is" . NOPE, don't believe that either. :angry: Unless it's someone you trust and then I would rather err by cautiously checking the item to be sure.:startled:
