Probably one of the hardest tasks a new modeler has to perform as a layout is designed and built, is to determine what stays and what goes, and what is shorter, smaller, less conspicous, or whatever, as one makes decisions about their project. In other words, compromise is often the pie of the day. Decisions have to be made about grades, minimum radius, whether to have a yard or not or two or three, whether to double track or not, whether to a reversing loops or not, etc. Here is a list of design compromises I have had to make so far. Initially I wanted 18 inch curves (N scale) for the layout, but the room I was building in had different ideas, so I had to reduce the radius to 16. I wanted a point to point plan, but my son wanted continous running, so we opted for continous running. I wanted to use foam in the construction, but I got a deal on MDF that I couldn't say no to, so I used it instead. I wanted a 59 inch top deck and a 39 inch bottom deck on our double decker, but because of a window, I opted for 57 and 37 inches - I would have prefered a higher bottom level. I wanted to model a protypical area around the Vancouver Ports, but I would have had to have unprototypical mainline running through an area that has no mainline; I decided to give this area up (I am still grieving). But there are some positive spin offs with compromise. Occassionally I have found myself biting off more than I can chew, except at the time I didn't know it. For example, when I tried to model the Vancouver Ports area, my building of the layout came to a screeching a halt as I tried to get a realistic backdrop (it would have been expensive) and an unrealistic track plan. I didn't do anything to the layout for half a year. After I decided to free lance the area, building almost immediately started up again. Instead of an expensive backdrop produced locally, I bought some Faller backdrops and a much more realistic price. Often compromise feels like you are not getting something you want, but other times I have found it has freed me up to proceed. So I am hoping some of you will list compromises you have had to make and the results of such decisions on your over all happiness level. What compromises have you made?
You have covered this well Rick and unfortunately for us modellers compromise is a way of life. For years I was frustrated by lack of space and constant moves by the company I worked for so went to N track modules as they were portable. They never really satisfied my desires as I always wanted a point to point layout that went through mountains with lots of tunnels and bridges. Once retired I had a constant area of 26ft. by 11ft. to do whatever I wanted. Well I built the N gauge railroad of my dreams but needed double level to fit it all in. I got it to the point of operating and 90% scenery completed only to realise that the compromise to make a double decked layout was wrong for me. I only liked the upper level and found the lower level to be a real pain. To fit the mountain passes I had to make the radius 15 inches which made passenger cars look awkward. Other areas allowed a 20 inch radius and I really liked that. To cut this short, I demolished that layout and I am now rebuilding it on just one level. My min radius is 20inches and it is point to point and at a height I am very happy with. The compromise I have had to make is shorter yards and passing tracks which will probably come to haunt me in time. Oh well, time to get on with the fun parts of this and be thankfull for what I do have.
Ok, here's my list. It's growing by the day! I started dry-run-laying track to get a feeel for how much track I'll actually have as opposed to the plan, which is turning out to be changing by the day, also. My 3-track hidden staging is likely to be reduced to 2, and the main yard will be 5 tracks, rather than 7, not to mention the 2 track intermodal yard condensed to 1. That's just for starters. I WILL keep a min radii of 20", and have the space to do it. I will have to modify the plan to keep that minimum standard, tho. I compromised on the benchwork, too. I could have done, and prolly should have done 24" wide modules, rather than 18", but that kept it cheaper. I am using cheapo 4' shop lites, with 40 watt bulbs as lighting, when I'd rather have a nice track lighting system, and 4-tube industial flourescents. The min mainline turnout would ideally best be a #8, and curved where applicable, but #6 is most realistic for the plan. Peco is the trunout I'd like to use, with caboose Ind. ground throws. The track centerlines are 1 1/4", but that may have to change, if the ground throws don't clear! The passing track is likely to stay at about 12-14', but the yard will be condensed sightly shorter, to allow for more generous radii. The present plan calls the yard to be about 13' long, but 11' or 12' is most likely for the above reason. The plan keeps changing byt he day, so this list will be updated again, I'm sure!
Another good topic Rick, In a way all layouts are about compromise we would all like large radius curves and unlimited space but unfortunately that is not always the case. I have had to run with 14 inch radius on my mainline due to insufficient space and my desire to have a long mainline to run loner trains, to do this the mainline runs thruogh the same scene twice something I will not do on my next layout. I also have 2% grades, this is due to enable the longer mainline (the layout is a double folded dogbone design) the only compromise here is the requirement to run a minimum of 2 locos on a train but to me thats not a disadvantage. I also wanted continuous running which I have but would now prefer end to end operations with the ability for continuous running. Building my layout has been a great learning experience. We will always have to make some compromise but as long as we don't live to regret it .
I have a problem.... I was laying out the track plan for the mainline, and finished it today. The thing I ran into is: I originally planned a 3 track hidden staging yard. The plan now will only acomodate 2 tracks, and with the backdrop, or building flats, or whatever I use to break the scene behind the main, to hide the staging tracks, I can only fit 1 now! Anyways, I want to get ideas for hiding the staging area, or if it even needs to be hidden? I have to re-plan the main thru the yard area, or cut out a yard track to get the 2nd staging track to fit. I have 1/2-3/4" extra foam overhanging the benchwork, but that was extra, to be on the safe side, and trim the excess later. I could keep it, but a backdrop, or faschia (sp?) would not be flush with the benchwork. I have a 1 5/8" center line on the main, meaning, from center, I have 1 5/8" on either side of the main. The staging area I believe is an even 2" away on center, to allow for the scene break for staging. Should I do away with staging being hidden, and leave 2 tracks open? Or would it be best to scale down further to 1 track, and have it hidden? Somehow a complete train of fruit reefers or a hot Z doublestack train awaiting its turn on the timetable, with motive power, sitting in a siding would look funny, while drag mainfests are grinding slowly by....... What do you think?
Depending on how you want to use your staging tracks, you might think about making your staging tracks removable. Run one track to the edge of your layout so it hits it at right angles, and rig up a way of easily connecting/disconnecting a length of track to it. Iain Rice's book "Small, Smart & Practical Track Plans" describes such an arrangement, he calls the removable part a "cassette". The track on your layout can be hidden, disguised as a spur, or whatever.
There is a debate on whether staging should be visible or not. Purist's argue that it should be hidden (real railroads don't have staging yards). Those that are more flexible in their execution of a layout feel that staging yards can be visible(and scenicked or semi-scenicked), and are on their layout - David Barrow's old Cat Mountain and Sante Fe comes to mind. Barrow argues for visible staging. You have lots of room for many tracks for staging under your layout. I don't recall if you are in N or HO. I just looked at your layout, and forgot to check that....lol. I would run the track around the bottom, if you are in N scale, 20 feet will give you 5 inches of clearance. Don't forget even on the track going down, you can have sidings (on either side of the main track) that hold staged trains. [ 03 April 2002, 20:35: Message edited by: rsn48 ]
I toyed with underlayout staging, but never materialized it.. due to the space factor. I have lots od space, but under the layout, I want to keep from having to crawl around to reach a derailment, or to clean the rails.. I CAN make a staging track that I have now, hide it behind something, and run a long ramp down to staging from another pt on the layout, and rejoin it to the main. Where would I put the new staging, so to keep grades decent, but the staging area outta the way? space behind the benchwork is only about 12-14" wide, until you reach the wall. I also got my flex track order last nite,a nd a pr of Peco #6's to test my turnout plans on the layout track plan I drew up. they all seem nicely executed, btu some are actually laid out as #8's, or even curved #8's! I'll leave that the way it is. Makes for smoother ops. Now... where to put staging...........
When I say under your layout, I mean around the perimeter. Imagine plywood for you track that is only about 8 inches wide. That would give you sidings on either side for staging. You would only have to reach in 8 inches for a derailment. With the staging I am planning under my layout, I will have some track further back for the main to come down, however the majority of it will be straight track with a couple of wide curves so I'm not worried about derailments. All of the accessible staging will be up front so I just have to reach in less than a foot to fiddle with it.
Rick, I got it all figured out: I built a 16' long section 5 inches wide to use for staging; 4 tracks wide on 1 1/4" centers. I screwed it to a series of 12 1x3-constructed angle supports. It looks cool,a nd will be hidden by the backdrop. Train will run in and out thru a small portal in the backdrop, concealed from view. I still have about a foot or so space in which I can access a derailment. The staging area will also have aguard rail of sorts to keep derailed cars off the floor. The staging area is bare plywood, even with the scenery base foam, eliminating any grades.
My major problem has always been the layout of towns and cities. I get it laid one way and then decide I don't like it and tear it all out and start over. Then I came up with the modular idea. I take a piece of 12"x12" foam or 1/4" plywood and build a mini-layout on this, i.e., a church with a graveyard and parking lot, etc. Once this is build to my satisfaction, I can put it anywhere on my layout. If I don't like it, I just pick it up and try it somewhere else. By using this approach, I can change a town/city on the fly, so to speak. I have found this to be a most valuable tool.
