Comments on first layout?

Please have look at this layout, and let me know what I am missing, what I should change or remove etc. Hopefully this link will work. I have uploaded the layout, and a breif description, to the Layout Depot. Thanks for any suggestions! http://www.layoutdepot.com/view.ihtml?step=3&fid=149

 

If you don't mind I would like to ask some basic questions.

1) What is the size of the layout in the "depot?" You had two sizes and I wasn't clear on the dimensions.

2) Is this your first layout?

3) HOw much room does the layout occupy. For example, is there two feet clearance on all sides? Is one side up against a wall? Or more than one side? What are the dimensions of the room? Where is the door? Is there a closet that can be "liberated?" Where is the closet?

4) What else is in the room, that will hinder the layout or define its boundaries. Is it in a bedroom, or a study, or a room in the basement by itself, or going under your bed, etc.?

5) How portable does this layout need to be?

6) Are there political boundaries - eg. you can half a room but not the other half?

All my questions rotate around the one question: have you used all the space available to you in an optimum fashion?

PS. Many moons ago...I went to college in Elmhurst Ill at Elmhurst College.

Rick Nicholson

[ 05 April 2002, 09:41: Message edited by: watash ]

 

Assuming this is a 4x8 , or 4x10 layout. I think you may have trouble with the double crossover in the front, Its going to take up a lot more room. Also the siding there is going to be short too. I suggest making the siding as long as possible, and 'splitting ' the crossing ( go from track 1 to track 2 at one end of the siding , and from track 2 back to track 1 at the other end.) This will eliminate a lot of complicatd track work....Mike

[ 05 April 2002, 09:43: Message edited by: watash ]

 

Al,
Very good plan, not over crowded with trackage, (all too easy to do when planning).
The first thing that jumped out at me was the possability of a scenic divider that could go from the upper left corner to the lower right corner, more generally than precisely. This seperates the layout into areas, I assumed the large structure to be a grain elevator? If so, then the divider could be used to hide the height of it from the other side. Some tweeking of track and structure placement would be necessary but the result would be worth it I think.

My 2 cents
2slim

 

Al, I gave your layout a vote of 8 because it is not just real clear about the cliff to me yet. It would seem you must have a grade up the side to reach the plateau , across, then down again to ground level for the outside track. The inner track must go in the tunnel and back out on the same level. It is the rendition of the cliff face that may be throwing my eye off. I see nothing you are missing, except a roundhouse. Everyone just HAS to have a roundhouse for the steam engines man! I'm kidding!

 

Thanks for the comments and suggestions! I'll try to answer all questions. It's 4'x8', or 32 sq. ft. The Layout Depot only allowed me to enter a range of sizes, hence the '32 to 48 sq. ft.' designation. Yes, this is my first layout. I plan on having at least two foot clearance on all sides. It will be in a basement room by itself. As fas portability, I would just like to be able to move it, if we eventually move. The crossing in the lower left hand side, was done with standard Atlas turnouts and crossing, so it should fit as drawn. I will look into the siding placement. The inside main goes through a tunnel, and stays level. The outside main climbs a 5% grade and then goes accross the from of the hill, and then goes down also a 5% grade. The 'cliff face' will probably be built as a stone (brick) retaining wall. I'll figure out how to do that with 3rdPlanit real soon now . Finally, I originally had a roundhouse where the engine house is currently, but decided to make it a little simpler.

 

Welcome, first of all.
Second I like it, it looks somewhat like the layout design in the book "The Railroad That Grows" (or title to that affect). Yours inspired me to get 'mousing' and get mine posted. Sooo...thanks for the inspiration.

 

Al,
I gave it an 8 in rates, I understood what you were doing all I see that it needs is a few more stuctures and your set to go...... Hope this helps...

 

Hi Al,

The track plan it's self, is quite effective with plenty of switching.
Looks like you have either a diamond crossing or two back to back turnouts on the left side and double slip in the front. (Guessing) Anyway, with care and attention to scenery and structures, should make an excellent looking layout. Keep up the good work.

Paul


[ 24 May 2001: Message edited by: Paul Templar ]

 

On the left hand side there is a turnout on the outer track that just uses a crossover to cross the inner track. In the front, that is four turnouts, with a 30 degree crossing in the middle. I figured that way I could either have two seperate mainline, or one longer mainline. Besides, I really like grade crossings.

 

I have bounced to the top in the N scale forum another layout in which a person requested help. It is in the N scale section of this forum. The title of the thread is "Updated Track Plan - Plan 8.)." This person came in with a simple request but was given a lot of recommendations and advise, some of which he used and modified from his original track plan and benchwork design. I think his thread is an excellent teaching devise for what can happen if the person is open to change and has the space to modify a plan.

Your room that your layout is going into is at least 8 by 12, if you are giving yourself 2 feet of clearance around all sides of your 4 by 8 layout. In a room this size you can have a much larger layout. But I don't like to push people who are entering the hobby and might not be headed in a "larger" layout direction.

So check out the recommended thread above, visit his site, highlighted in red, and see if this is the kind of critiquing you would like. If so, let us know and I will suggest alternate ways to use the room you have.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Al Oomens:
The outside main climbs a 5% grade and then goes accross the from of the hill, and then goes down also a 5% grade.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a really steep grade Al, and you don't really gain anything from it other than the upper and lower level. If the two loops crossed over each other to form a folded figure eight then you would double the length of the main. Then the steep grade does gain something.

The double cross over would make more opperational sense if it were two single crossing at either side of the passenger station. However this would make the over/under crossing far to steep.

IMHO the yard design is sound. I would add a crossover at the end of one of the tracks to inbound engines will have an escape after uncoupling from their trains.

 

Al, The Linn H. Westcott book 101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders has a track plan that is very similar to yours. It is plan number 46 "Jordan Valley RR". In N scale it would fit on a 4x8 but would be really spectacular build in N around the walls af a room that a 4x8 would fit in.

If you can't get a hold of this book (it is available at most US Libraries and is in print again) let me know off line and I can get the plan to you (shhh don't tell Kalmbach)

Anyway - there is a double track main line with a single track branch line. The single track crosses over the double and in order to get this to work the DT drops down an inch and the ST climbes up an inch - the resulting grade is under 3%

The Jordan Valley RR also features a rather large yard and passanger station, a small station, three industry sidings and two (count 'em; two) juctions with level crossings

And as an extra added bonus there is a section of hidden track on the branch line that would be a perfect place for two or three staging tracks.

 

Other than Mikes advice which I agree with that is a good track plan. There is room for a small town on the left side and some pasture or whatever with a small lake on the right.

 

You Said:

That's a really steep grade Al, and you don't really gain anything from it other than the upper and lower level. If the two loops crossed over each other to form a folded figure eight then you would double the length of the main. Then the steep grade does gain something.

The double cross over would make more opperational sense if it were two single crossing at either side of the passenger station. However this would make the over/under crossing far to steep.


The idea was to allow either a double, or extended single mainline. With the switches in the double crossover in the normal (straight) position, there would be a double main, with them in the crossover position it would be a figure-8 extended single mainline. Is that not a good idea?

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Al Oomens:
With the switches in the double crossover in the normal (straight) position, there would be a double main, with them in the crossover position it would be a figure-8 extended single mainline. Is that not a good idea?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Weeeelllll, It's not a bad idea... But I must say it looks better on paper than it works in real life. There are a couple of reasons for this. The first is the S curve that is formed by the cross over. This is fine when you are switching, taking a siding, or just changing from running on the inside or outside loop because all of these operations take place at low speeds. To successfully negotiate a crossover you need to slow your train down - just like the 1:1 models do. The second problem is the crossing in the middle of the double crossover. More points means more chances for derailment. At low speeds this is not much of a problem but when you just want to let 'em rip, you may be disappointed. Of course large turnouts will help to alleviate the problem, but those take up space.

Anyway - I sent that track plan from 101 Track Plans to ya. Let us know what you think.