A lot of us are plan doodlers. I know I have consumed many trees drawing up plans on all kinds of paper, from epic pikes to the little portable switching layouts. The epic layout is actually easier to design in many ways because there are no limits to your imagination. Do I need another yard? Well, ok lets just tape another piece of paper onto this plan. But the little switching layout seems to be where things get real dicey. How few turnouts do I need to make a tiny layout interesting? Case in point; the time saver. It seems to have everything you need and it only has 5 switches and fits on a small plank. Then there is the sceniced switching layout. You need space for structures and some kind of realistic patterns. Unlike the time saver, one industry cannot receive every type of car ever made. I've been tinkering with paper and considering just how minimal I could go with a layout and still have it be fun to run for a long time. This is not just an exercise as I am looking at all the stuff I have hoarded up over the years and am thinking a small shelf layout could be a fun distraction. I am curious to hear from people with experience with switching layouts. What has worked out best for you. What didn't work. What kind of plan do you have for your trackage. Etc.
I believe it depends upon how much time you wish to be occupied. The less there is do accomplish, the less time to be spent. Then you must start over again. That could become boring or repititious.
I once tried to design the smallest practical roundy round layout with switching. The loop would be used as a "circulation loop", not a mainline. A switcher would runaround by going all the way around the loop. I figured I could fit it in 2x3 feet in N, a little more than the length of 2 track switches longer than a minimum 9 3/4" radius loop. Two spurs inside the loop, two outside, with one going off the edge like an interchange connection. My original idea was a paper mill. I could run bulkhead racks full of pulpwood, tank cars of chemicals, boxcars of finished paper out, occasional flatcars of machinery. A certain amount of variety. But lots of people have modeled paper mills. I wanted to do something different. The prototype of the huge layout I once dreamed of building if I had a million dollars included a Navy base for blimps. Not THAT would be a rarely modeled subject. I used almost the same trackplan, had lots of fun creating specific buildings from the ruins of the abandoned base. However the layout took special cars, and I only acquired or built a limited number of them- helium tanks, Navy-owned aviation fuel tanks, Navy ordnance boxcars, flatcars. Not a whole lot of variety in the operation. I enjoy running it at shows and letting little kids run it- even preschoolers. And I enjoy old timers say "My dad worked on the roof of that hanger" (world's largest wooden building) painted in perspective on the background. But because of limited variety of operation, I don't run it all that much for myself, even though my main "big" layout has not been far enough along to run. If I were going to do something like this over again, a portable layout concentrating of switching, I would try to see if I can transport a slightly larger layout in my car, six inches bigger in each dimension- 30" x 42" rather than 24" X 36". And I would try a subject that allowed much wider variety of cars, such as an inner city industrial and warehouse district.
Short Answer: About 20 Minutes. -- In an ideal world I expect my personal attention span will allow for about 20 minutes of switching before I have to do something else. So When - The expansion takes place and the 'loop' is 40 linear feet full circle Then - I envision running my 'local freight' and perhaps one unit train around the loop while I switch cars on the Grey and Grandure. The local freight will have to take a siding as the unit trains pass. This means mufti-tasking to prevent rear end collisions. That should keep me busy for a couple of hours. But If - I'm showing off for guests - well, then everything derails and it doesn't matter.
I agree with the Grey One. A small layout is a relative term, but if it has less than about 30 feet total in track, you can cram a lot of switching into it and it won't be any the more "interesting", or for any longer. Let's face it, even with six or ten switching moves, by the time you have powered up the layout 20 times and done all the possible combinations about 20 times, what's left? If operations are all that interest you, you may extend your interest for several months. If you enjoy the scenicking and development of the layout, and its planning, you add to the layout's interest and life that way. I don't believe Grey One intends to spray cold water over your enthusiasm or expectations, and certainly I don't. But, to be honest and fair, a small layout is only going to have so much in it that it can do. Even the vaunted switching puzzles, once mastered, become the same repetitive processes that any other small layout becomes. You'll want to get into advanced structure building or scratching, master scenery, and plan for the next layout to keep your interest. In some ways, the roundy-rounders, of which I am mostly one, get the max out of any layout. Their expectations are simple, and they enjoy watching the trains. One can do that on a small layout or a large complicated one. Even so, most of us get tired or bored of that same old loop. So a well-balanced layout, from the builder's standpoint, will incorporate all he wants to enjoy. The less the trains have to do, the more quickly the novelty fades. Larger layouts with more industries, bigger yards, more servicing, etc, hold interest longer. Bottom line: smaller layouts have less room, across scales, and can be compromised by trying to cram too much track into a small space. It won't make the enjoyment greater, or even longer. All of us take a sober look at our space and work hard to plan some running to enjoy a coffee or a beer, maybe while chatting or showing off the layout, and we have one or two industries with some switching for variety. If you get a whole basement, the world is your oyster.
I have a roundy roundy for my HO stuff. I'm sitting on a bunch of N scale and wondering what to do. So in answer to the responses... 1. It should be interesting enough to keep one busy. 2. It should allow for enough space to keep detailing. I dunno, I just had to throw it out there. Maybe I should just build a time saver and play with that sans scenery for a bit.
Well, my own opinion would be to do a variation on Plan #14. Yes, I am obsessed with this plan for reasons dating back to high school. Simplify it as you see fit. The basic components are: Interchange yard at one end - can be 2 to 4 tracks including a run-a-round. In an ideal world it has an arrvial and departure track but certainly does not need one. One to Four feet of track leaving the yard to the spurs One to Three back facing spurs, (spurs requiring a back up move) One to Three front facing spurs, (spurs to go directly into) The train needs to be made up at the 'yard' such that the cars can be shunted to the right spur The cars need to be arranged at the yard so the local freight can pick them up. Hope this helps. Plan #14 'Stretched Out'
Grey One, You've been posting this plan for as long as I remember you being on here. It is definitely the plan that has stuck to you. I think you've made numerous versions of it too. I have been drawing plans as well. I suppose I should get digital image of what I have been pondering and post it up. It has similar properties as your plan, although my premise is one of a turn delivering cars to a small yard and then a local being made up from that. SO in my universe a train arrives with cars and then it is turned into a local that delivers those cars. But I always think of the time saver as being the ultimate switching problem, but once you assign a specific building to a spur, it then becomes very car load oriented; a warehouse won't be receiving a tank car as a delivery, etc. It is quite the conundrum when making a small switching type layout.
(Written in a congenial way but not sure if the text carries it) I do apologize if it has been overkill. Given that I joined 3 months after you did that makes sense. I've probably posted it twice a year give or take. . I'm obsessed and need consulting. However, I'll make a point not to darken your threads with it again. Side note: Hmmml, the two of us have been on here for 10+ years. Do we get a pin or something?
Yep I came on here after leaving Atlas forum. Been a fun ride so far. I've gone from building N scale layouts in my basement to building HO scale layouts in my front yard. Now pondering a small N scale one back in the house while it's cold outside.
My layout does occupy a large space but it was built to be a switching layout. It is a point to point layout with a yard and engine facility at each end but does have three hidden staging tracks that can allow for continuous running, but is normally used to store inbound and outbound trains serving both of the yards. Instead of having multiple tracks circling through the layout multiple times, the main line passes through the layout only one time. This allows me room for the 20+ industries on the layout and also room for towns that can be detailed. For me personally, watching trains go in circles can get boring after a while. I can have an incoming freight train come into either yard, break it down and then make up a train to serve the various industries along the main line. Each town has a switching problem purposely built into it. A typical trip with about a 12 to 14 car train can take a couple of hours to complete its switching duties if I want, or just a couple of industries can be serviced in a lot less time. It all depends on how much time I choose to spend running trains.
Sounds like a fun layout. I am very space limited, hence the garden ho layout. And if you have not lived in the west where things are drier, you have no idea about our dust problems. I always hated building a nice layout scene only to have it get a bit dusted over after a while. So My thoughts are toward an enclosed layout that can have the glass cover removed and be played with. I was already planning on going to buy some stuff at the hobby store, but wouldn't you believe that my sewer line decided to cost me 835.00 in repairs this last week. SO I guess layout has to go on hold a bit.
Beyond a rough idea of what I wanted I have never been able to design a layout on paper. I get the baseboards made then shuffle track and structures around until I am happy. That can take a while, as it is best to leave it for a while then come back to see it with fresh eyes, so to speak. After track plan is more or less finalised I will draw it on the boards then do some test switching by hand using suitable cars placed on the drawn lines to check how everything will fit. When satisfied track is laid and wired and fully tested. At this stage any required or needed changes are made and tested and when happy, ballasting is done. Basically, mine is a 'suck it and see' method!
We have more in common than I thought. Sigh. my Love / Wife and I were planning on attending the 'West Springfield, MA show. The next morning I came down to a fresh cup of coffee - wait for it - , no, really, wait for it. I'm not ready to tell you, you , aaaah, never mind, The washing machine died, yep, cloths washer in a home with 3 women and a 5yo. Ya, about that trip. Maybe next year. The glass case is a nice idea. If you want any Unitrak please let me know. I will have lots left over after the expansion.
Back in the late 60's when I was stationed at Mare Island on instructor duty in the Navy, I was lucky enough to have attended a number of operating sessions at John Allens G&D railroad. Usually after an operating session he would take out his "time Saver" switching set up and would have a ball watching us on the layout. It was quite small but was quite a challenge. Here it is.
OMG it's one of the original Time Savers! I am not worthy. What is cool about the time saver is that in order to make it smaller he used Wye switches due to their shorter length, not to mention all the hand layed track. Grey One, I feel your pain. Was up last night working. In order to make the job cheaper I did all my own demolition and then had to figure out how to replace the floor. Good thing I have lots of experience building bench work, but it was actually kind of a tricky operation. Alan, I tend to do a similar approach. I have had too many layouts where I get track down and then realize I do not have space for structures. And despite these efforts to make things fit, it still doesn't fit! I guess I don't have your skill. Your new layout ( those of you who do not visit HO scale land take note, as it's a good track plan in any scale. http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?158746-Building-the-Andersley-Western-Railroad ) has a lot of nice features. The idea of making all the spurs face out from the center is a nice touch.
If that's an industry on the bottom would have it on its own spur, Otherwise the cars there will ALWAYS have to be moved to switch it. That switch could be put between the two RH switches in middle.& have that spur use a Xing to get to it.
I think that was the idea. Simply deliberate complication. (Is that an oxymoron? Would Oxymoron & Son be an appropriate name for an industry?)
