OK. this is the design of my layout if I were to start building tommorrow. But I am smarter then that. The room is finished, I have already installed lights, and I have even put up pilasters to begin building bench work. Most of the information is at www.minilur.com/trains.htm thanks for any input.
Barry, I like your layout design your principle of operation is similar to mine where I have a large single line layout with yards and industries. My only preference is through yards rather than stub ended yards. I see you have the ability for a train to enter the yard then detach the locomotive and set back. This is definately an advantage because backing a tain around a curve will be difficult and limit the length of your trains. My only suggestion if you had space was to have a through yard rather than a stub ended yard but it all comes down to space and personnal preference. Good luck with your layout and i look forward to seeing your progress.
I tend to agree with Paul about through versus stub yard. Not that there is anything wrong though. It is your empire. My one thought is that it appears your yard crosses a doorway. Thus you have a duck under situation? I was thinking that perhaps you could flip your plan over. So the yard and roundhouse are on the left side. And maybe leave the doorway clear? It does look like an interesting track plan. Am sure you'll get many hours of great value from this entire process! Boxcab E50
Ok this is a little rough but this is what I suggest, you will notice there is also no need for a duck under.
i like your first plan. Why don't u flip it. That way your yard will be along the longer wall and u won't have a duck under.
I really like the linear and uncluttered layout concept. I agree with flipping the layout left to right to avoid a duckunder, but I am 47 years old, and have a bad back! I also have three access holes requiring duckunders, and I call them cussing holes. I also recommend putting the yard lead in front of the roundhouse for easier access in case of derailments.... (Don't ask how I know this!) Or, you could keep it the same, but build it at about 55 inches off the floor to allow a "nod under." If you keep the duck under, it appears that the yard could be longer, with a few grades to get the far loop either over or under the yard tracks. I commend you for finishing the room first. It will help you stay there many happy hours.
Colonel et al, I like the suggestion about the run through yard, but where you have placed it , it looks like I may have an access problem. I am going to try flipping the layout. I will post a picture when updated.
Barry, You are right in the through yard would not be very practical being against the wall I was just trying to give you an idea on the advantages of a through yard. The yard needs to be at the front of the layout for obvious reasons . I look forward to seeing what you come up with.
still working on it. I've moved the yard, but still haven't made it a run-thru yard. Obviously I lose space with a ladder at each end. In this plan the yard has room for appx. 35 cars (40' and 50').
What I keep noticing is the tight access you will have on the left. I presume you have left out the benchwork which will consume some inches. And to me, it looks like you only have around 24 of seperation without the benchwork. So I am wondering how wide your aisle will be on the left with benchwork in. I will look at your plan and see if I can come up with something. I keep editing this as I study your plan. My first question is what is that wall that comes part way out down the middle. More importantly is it weight bearing, can you get rid of it. Secondly, I noticed you said zero grades. I didn't know if this was a given, a druther, or whatever. On your left, have you considered a helix down to a deck underneath for your staging. This would give you some decent room for staging. Another thing you could do, is imagine the area on your left as a nolix area, leading to three decks. The first deck would be staging, and only about 6 inches seperation, the next two decks would be around 16 inches apart. This would give you a much longer running layout. The nolix area, would be a long oval (you can modify this shape to be a bit kidney shape) . The nolix would provide a mountainous area for your trains with bridges, tunnels etc. you would try and keep most of the nolix visible (the track) so only when it disappears behind do you loose site of the track. [ 12. December 2002, 06:40: Message edited by: rsn48 ]
Also, there's nothing wrong with a yard on a curve. I've seen some pretty nice ladders swing around a curve, and the plus is it makes them longer.
Nolix? Where can I find info on this? I am looking at building an 'L' shaped layout (around 12' per leg... I need to measure) and I am thinking at least one leg may be double decked. Who has some good suggestions on where to research this?
My first thoughts in regards to the wall- There is plumbing from an upstairs bathroom (I have to take what space I can get) that rooms through the wall at about the 6' height. We have already redone the plumbing to get it to that height. So tunnels, etc. are a distinct possibility, but getting rid of the wall completely would be difficult. I need to triple check the wall to see if it is load bearing, it seems more to be there to hide the plumbling.
Given how short it is, I am willing to bet it isn't weight bearing. To find out about nolix's, just scroll back on the topics in layout design, you will find several nolix references and definitions. Basically it is like a helix, except more open to get more mainline running (visible). The problem with a helix is that the majority of the time, or all the time, the track is hidden. The purpose of a nolix is allow elevation gain, with more than 50 percent of the track visible.
A year ago or so you faxed me a plan for a 'nolix', and I've read past posts about it. Do you have a photo of one? As for the grade, I guess it falls into the druthers catagory. In the back of my mind (and how the room was finished) there is room for a two/three level layout. I was going to finish this one, and then figured in the future I would do the second level. Also, as this is my first layout larger then an HO 4' x 8' (I've done three of those), and my first N layout, I put reliable track/running at the top of the wish list. As for the staging area, I was avoiding that, I wanted to have a yard to display my cars. I guess I fall into the catagory of egotistical empire builder/owner. I have now brought the time frame up to 1972, so Amtrak and BN green will be showing up. ( I have an eBay problem to boot). The point being, I like the idea of the mountains, particulary in the NW here. I think I will stay true to the time period, and the railroads, but I'm leaning more and more to making the track imaginary and not based on any prototypical routes in this area. Is this legal? As for the question about the space, yes, there will be some tight areas, but I think I can keep the two tightest aisles to 18".
This is the wall in question. If you go to my webpage, you can click on the thumbnail to get a larger file size of the picture.
Nolix's aren't standardized like helix's, but if you scroll back and look at some of the recent nolix threads, you will see some pictures to get your brain going.
I was not suggesting that you remove the wall Berry ... I was only thinking that you might be able to punch a 'tunnel' through it, which could open up an entirely different scheme of operation in your planning
