Ok, so you all saw this post pop up an thought, "oh no, geepfan is asking about layout design again!" (referring to my old redundant threads that I started all the time 3-4 years ago.....). However this time its probably a project I may actually complete :teeth:. Ok, so I've been an HO modeler as long as I can remember, did a little dabbling in N scale, but not much. My club has been wanting to participate in a community group program that Wendy's is hosting in our area (we earn 10% of dinner profits for hosting an event in the lobby of a store). I would like to do something more than sit around in a vacant booth and hand out worlds greatest hobby flyers to people who walk by. I've had a 2x4 frame from an old module laying around for years. the top has been gutted of all useful parts, but the frame and legs are intact. My plan is to attach a 3x5 sheet of plywood and inch think foam (the good kind, not that cheap stuff that breaks into beads when cut!) to make a display layout to take with me to these events to show that we actually do some stuff. Since we're located in Colorado, I based the plan on a fictional shortline in the Colorado Rocky's. Motive power would be a lone Alco or EMD 4 axle model (probably ex-DRGW). This particular trackplan is drawn from my old HO scale 4x8 that I had until about 2 years ago, I was very fond of the plan, even if it didn't offer what I wanted in HO scale. However, for a display layout, I think it works out pretty well. The backdrop running down the middle will make the 3x5 seem larger, and the industrys are small in capacity, but switching will be minimal, the layout will mostly operate as a "display" layout for people to look at and admire. I did include them simply because I would like to demonstrate "some" switching for people, and show how a railroad hauls freight. IE, the interchange would have a sign on the outside of the layout explaining how it allows the shortline railroad to ship its freight to the outside world. My big question for those out there. Does this look like a viable display layout? I'm not a big N scaler, but I think its feasible to operate reliably for a couple of hours, barring loose hands wandering onto the layout. I've been looking at the local hobby shop (where I am now an employee at that!, start training on Saturday!) and taking in the N scale selection. I've been thinking about getting an Atlas RS-3 in D&RGW colors and applying a patch for the shortline. Rolling stock would be a mixture of companies products with micro trains couplers and trucks (I've heard these are pretty good, *ducks to avoid tomatos from those who have alternate opinions*). lemme know what opinions and ideas for this you come up with. don't be afraid to bash it, I can take opinions.
Looks viable. I see the grade noted for your mine. In that short disatnce, can you actually have much of a grade?
BoxcabE50 asked, "In that short distance, can you actually have much of a grade?" Don't know that you need much of a grade, since not needing to go over or under. Just a little sense of not flat tabletop. I put in a slight grade to a spot intended for a mine on a 2x4 foot N layout I built in 1969. A display layout in 30 inches x 40 inches.... thrown together in 10 days. A 2x3 foot switching layout I consider a fairly serious operating layout.
Yeay for small, portable layouts! From my experience with Free-moN and taking my own little "Train-in-a-Box" layout to shows, I've been amazed at: 1. How much time I spend talking with people about trains and 2. How difficult it is (at least for me), to run switching ops while talking with people. When I've changed my ops plan to only deal with unit trains (or 1/2 unit trains), then it's much easier to talk & run trains at the same time. For your design, I'd think about unit trains in terms or 4-5 cars 9 (12"-14"). That'd be about 3 long covered hoppers, 4 100T hoppers or 5 short 70T hoppers. (40' car = 3.5" including couplers) Then you set the sidings and spaces accordingly. Here's some suggestions: You already have that space on both sides of the runaround / passing siding as well as the interchange. I suggest extending the yard tracks to about 15"-16" each (orange), one for each unit/block of cars (on a curve is fine since the block stays together so no coupling on the curve). You also need to extend the team track to clear the crossover, and it can double as sort of a drill track if long enough. I'd swap the mine and the interchange tracks. The mine would be on the interior, up against those backdrop mountains. Two tracks (red) of about 14" will allow a loco to bring a cut of 4-5 hoppers in and pull a cut out. The interchange (yellow) then is a long track closer to the edge of the layout, allowing for easier "fiddling" (putting cars on and taking them off). You could still have a ridge between the interchange and mainline, though really a copse of trees would probably be enough to act as a partial viewblock (at least a mental one). Grain elevators usually work by a loco pushing or pulling a cut of cars through the loader, which requires space past the elevator. As is, you can load only one car at a time. Tacking on a short (even 12") detachable extension (lime gree) allows you to run a cut of 3-4 covered hoppers through. Make the extension 2' with a turnout and you can add another cut (empty or loaded) to the ops. However, display layouts that have narrow things sticking out usually get bumped, so I'd keep it short like 12". By making these changes, you can run cuts of cars roundy-round, then drop off & pick up another cut to continue roundy round, all the while talking away. Two locos should do the trick, and if you want more involved ops, then you can assemble a mixed train of boxcars, hoppers and coal to "somewhere else" via the interchange. But 10:1 says you'll be talking with people too much And don't forget access to the track in the tunnel Anyway, food for thought. And cheers to your small, portable layout to N-thusiastically spread the word of the fab world of N scale.
MC- Just working from his notation on the drawing of up to 2%, in what appears to be a three foot or less distance. If any rise, I would doubt anything close to 2% will be truly useful, and it will need to be much less.
No grades in my revision. A partial viewblock of trees / slight rise, along with a different ballast, would be enough to separate the interchange from the rest of the layout.
wow, I didn't expect this many responses so fast! MC: The extension past the grain elevator is an idea I hadn't thought of before, I might do something like that. That was an issue on the old HO version of this layout as well, and I think I ended up moving the grain elevator to a platform on the outside edge of the layout a little further towards the switch so I could move past it. However the mine, I really don't want to put in the middle of the layout. Reason being is that the club is moving a mine on the large HO layout, and one piece thats coming out is an old mine interior. It has some minecarts, lanterns, and miners digging into the rock wall underground. I wanted to attach this to the side of the layout so kids could look into the mine. Its a nice idea to have the mine in the middle, but I doubt this layout will operate in a switching fashion that often. More than likely the roundy-round feature is what is going to be used when members of the club other than myself are demoing the layout. I did plan on swinging the yard tracks around the corner, like I did on the HO version, I'm just terrible at the atlas RTS program, and thus didn't do it in the plan. I also had 3 yard tracks, not 2 on the HO version, I might try to squeeze the third one back in. Kenneth: I really liked that little blurb about the layout being completed in 10 days. More than likely thats going to be my goal, as we have another community night at the end of this month. Right now funding is the only hold point. As for the grade in the plan. I had already scratched that idea when I posted this thread. Like Kenneth said, I only want to break up a flat table top not make a big height difference. the 2% was something I threw in and was too lazy to go back in and remove from the plan. thanks for the ideas and suggestions guys.
Hi, mc Fujiwara, you took the words right out of my mouth. You made it a great plan. Chapeau! Almost like yours, i had drawn this: Paul
If you'll look at the Kenneth's "thrown together" in 10 days display layout, you'll note that it doesn't have any turnouts, a scenery divider, structures (other than bridges and maybe a couple of tunnel portals), roads, trees or bushes. I think it's highly unrealistic to think you will be able to "throw together" your proposed layout in less than two weeks. If it's a display layout you're building, what are you displaying? Are you displaying "throwing together" a layout? Or are you displaying a really nice model that demonstrates some of the advantages of N-scale (small size, portability, operational potential)? let's see...hmmm...you've got your benchwork to build, your subroadbed to think about (going 2" extruded Styrene insulation?), nine turnouts to install (and the associated actuation and wiring), all that track between turnouts to install, wiring to do (complex if you're using DC, less complex, but more expensive if you're using DCC), a scenery divider/skyboard to build and paint, a curved tunnel to make, what looks like a dirt road and a paved road to make, a cassette to engineer and build, mountains to design and build, a bridge to build and install, at least one structure (the mine) to make and install, a river to create...then...you've got to put some kind of scenery colors and textures on all of it (ground cover, trees, bushes, static grass, something to represent water, telegraph poles, grade crossings, tunnel portals, rock castings or carvings)....WHEW! I'm sure I'm not covering all of what needs to be done...in TEN DAYS!!! When people at the shows or wherever you're at, look at your layout, do you want them to admire it, or just see a "thrown together" layout? Methinks most of the unwashed public really doesn't care if it only took you less than two weeks to throw together a little layout. They appreciate its aesthetics, how well it runs and all that detailing that you won't be able to accomplish in less than a third of a month of working on it. I agree that setting timetables and milestones is important when building a layout or a module, but...ten days? Gotta look at that goal of yours that you want your little layout to be "admired". To accomplish that, you gotta do a good job...and to do that in ten days with your relatively complex design is ridiculous. Cheers! Bob Gilmore
My N scale layout, that is for now in hiatus due to outdoor Ho/oo obsessiveness. 2 x 3 feet, 9" radius curves, Atlas c55 with manually thrown turnouts. Since the photo, it has been enlarged on one end so as to make a 2 track yard/interchange.
Paul: nice job on the layout design. I like the creek & bridge as visual divider between interchange and mine. In the town, having the turnout above the passing siding does extend the yard tracks a bit, but that means that one of the yard tracks has to be partially empty in order to service the team tracks. Flip the turnout and the loco can use the passing siding to serve the team track without bothering any cuts of cars in storage. I understand the appeal of a visual display, especially one that's already built But that's an HO mine? And you're putting it in the front of an N scale layout? Seems like that would visually block out most of that side. Any reason you can't place the "display" mine on top of the mountain over the tunnel? As a second mine or extension of the inner mine complex? Then you'd have all the benefits of Paul & my suggestions in terms of operations and composition as well as including your mine interior. Just a thought.
hmmm, putting the mine interior in the hillside actually isn't a bad idea. Its not really an HO scale interior, nor an N scale interior. I'm not sure what scale the figures are, but they aren't either.
