I like it - you have picked a main modeling goal, and you are working towards that. Couple of suggestions: I think I would have tried to avoid having the outer curve around the top left be both the yard switching lead and necessary to switch the industries along the top side at the same time. Maybe try to have the spur leading in to the industries along the top wall branch off from somewhere along the upper right hand corner instead ? Or alternately maybe moving the yard one track width out (right) and having the yard ladder come off the track running by the engine house instead? Then the switching of the area along the top wall can use the outer track though the upper left hand curve as a switching lead, (and use the runaround along the rear of the left wall when necessary), while the yard can be switched using the second curve around the upper left hand corner, curving around the enginehouse. I guess you want to preserve the option of adding a liftout across the door, even though you haven't put on in on your drawing? Otherwise you don't have to curve the track at the lower end of the runaround by the left wall towards the door - you could have made it straight, and gained a few car lengths on the yard tracks, possibly making fewer but longer yard tracks, and maybe finding room for an industry flat along the left wall. Depends on what your goal is for this area. I see that the "put the industries at an angle across the corners" doesn't work visually - approach gets too steep and curved. Maybe a good idea to put the one in the lower right hand corner back to how you had it initially, or to make the engle such that it only gently slants along the right wall - say a ratio of 4 units along right wall to one unit out along bottom wall or something like that. I think I would also have considered deleting some tracks from the industries along the top part of the layout, to open it up some more. Upper left hand corner - delete the track leading into the building and make a truck loading dock next to the track instead, with a concrete apron coming in from the road. Center industries along the top wall - pull industry no 2 forward and put both industries along the same track - makes for more interesting switching. For the one in the upper right hand corner, consider deleting the extra track leading up to it and just lengthening the switching lead (third track from top wall now) all the way over to the upper right hand corner. You can have an industry on a switchback lead, as long as you have enough room to use the rest of that spur for switching without having to remove cars at the industry at the end of the switchback lead first. For the team track along the aisle, I would have considered deleting one of the tracks (the one closest to the mainline). Interchange - I would have considered making one of the yard tracks be the interchange track instead of trying to use the short tail of the runaround in the lower right hand corner as the interchange track. If you park a single car at the tail end of the runaround in the lower right hand corner, you block the use of the runaround as a runaround. Using a single ended track in the yard, on the other hand, doesn't cost you a thing - your yard still has enough capacity by far. Another option with regards to the peninsula is to put the viewblock along the left edge of the peninsula, and making that scene deeper, with some warehouses and extra tracks for temporarily storing cars between the viewblock/warehouse and your carfloat, all served from the right aisle of your room. It would also prevent someone coming in the door from seeing the whole layout - you would have to walk around the peninsula to see the innermost part of the layout. Matter of taste what you prefer to do in this area. Visually, one thing you might want to consider is whether to locate the main track (and the road running along the track) one third of the way out from the wall, or one third of of the way in from the aisle, instead of running it down the centerline of the shelves. It would split the layout area better into scenery zones and rail zones. I would be inclined to run the main track 1/3rd of the way from the wall on a wider shelf, to gain more space for foreground scenes. But this is all nitpicking - I think your basic concept is pretty sound now. Smile, Stein
Wanted to add my 2 cents here. First off, I like the latest plan a LOT more. It definitely looks like a 'plan with a purpose' as someone else has said. I also think that Justin, being a youngster, is working on a "dream layout". Odds are this will be a many years project; maybe something not realized until much later in life for him as reality (college, job, family), infringes.... Please dont take offense. We are all on roughly the same journey. Soooo, philosophy aside.... I do think this is a good community excercise for layout planning as many people add their opinions. I know that I am taking notes! My primary criticism is this. There does not seem to be a MAIN LINE track. Sure, there is a continuous loop, but it relies on trains taking a slalom course though one of more turnouts. Personally, I would build something on a skeleton of a single, or dual mainline. Everything would spur off of this, without recourse for trains navigating S-curves. Hope this makes sense.
Well, there is one turnout where the main track looks a little funky going through a turnout and doing some curving - the one in the upper left hand corner. But a double track main would probably be a bit overkill for an industry area (as opposed to mainline running). It's not all that weird to have cramped conditions in an industry area. Justin can always fiddle with things like how spurs branch into industries, curve radius, main/running track path through the area, how far into the scene his main track runs. I would also have tried to vary shelf depth more, and generally have gone for not quite that deep scenes. But having said that, I think his basic track plan is reasonably sound. It would be fairly easy to make the main track of his plan more pronounced and less curvy - doing e.g. something along these lines: But that can always be adjusted while he is laying track - he now has room for aisles and room for track, and a feasible division of the layout into zones. And with the fairly wide shelves it is not so dangerous if he changes his mind a bit about spurs etc - he has room to change things around and experiment as he goes. Smile, Stein
Hi Steve -- I am using XtrakCad, since that's the one I am used to. Can be downloaded for free from http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage. Btw - be warned - if you want to try it, be prepared to forget how you feel things "should" work based on experience with other programs, and be prepared to learn how to do it the XtrkCad way. Smile, Stein
I made a new design based of of your earlier ones. I like how your earlier plan ares simple yet provide alot of operations. I made the yard bigger and did a few modifications to some industries I was thinking of getting Lance Mindheim's book but since I am on a budget, I don't want to buy something that is not entirely essential.
It's looking alot better. Just a few things though. You don't really need two sidings on the right. Get rid of the switchback as it'll just cause you problems because you'll have to move any cars in the bottom spur. It's just extra work for nothing. As you have a 3' reach to the back of the yard., you might think about reversing the industry spurs and the yard. You'll be working the yard more than those spurs.
Those "industries at the yard are actually an engine-house and a freight house. I will put names on them on my next track-plan update. I will also be fixing that switchback and adding some scenery. If anyone has any other track-plan ideas I would sure like to see them!
Justin a couple of thoughts…..and remember I know very little of layout design so take every thing with a grain of salt. A couple of your less than desirable habits have crept back into your new plan. On the lower left your yard has 5 HO tracks in 12” wide space (with a cross over). That is not going to work for the guy who has to build it. I know your CAD program is letting you do it but the track won’t. I would read Byron Henderson’s CAD Too Soon article http://layoutvision.com/id40.html While there I would also read Cornerstones to Layout Design http://layoutvision.com/id8.html and The Three Keys for Ops’ http://layoutvision.com/id10.html In that same area you are reaching over 3 buildings to a 30” corner in area were your crews will have couple and uncouple cars frequently. If you “Had” to have that set up in that corner I would play around and try to mirror it so the less frequently work cars (locos) are further back. I would re-visit Stein’s plans for guidance. You track next to the car float probably won’t work there either… just not enough room. Far right side, 4th square up from the bottom… again to much stuff in too little space. One more suggested read….. not design specific but more MRR philosophy which impacts layout design http://siskiyou-railfan.net/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2337 These are the things that jumped out to me. Keep at it though and never stop thinking ratled PS -"I was thinking of getting Lance Mindheim's book but since I am on a budget, I don't want to buy something that is not entirely essential". This is, or something like it, is essential. If it saves you from "wasting" 3 pieces of flex track it pays for itself. You make money if save four pieces of flex track. If you can eliminate just one turnout it makes you money too. You can get it used at E bay or Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/1449505643/ref=sr_1_olp_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1267498832&sr=8-1&condition=used r
Buy it. Read it. You need it, because you still haven't understood the principles well enough to apply them for yourself. Also, consider this : if you realistically can't afford to spend $20 on a book, you can't realistically afford to buy all the stuff you would need build a room sized layout either. I know that kids (and unrealistic adults) always are going "but I can build the layout real cheap". Nope. Not unless you have a lot of time on your hands, and the patience to redo things over and over and over again until they work. Not realistic for an adolescent. Or for most adults (including myself). If you have to fit in school, a job, a family or other activities along with the model railroading, you'd better be prepared to substitute some cash for time, or to spend a long time on scratch-building stuff and fiddling with stuff to make it work. If you really are on a tight budget, may I instead suggest just building a simple L-shaped switching layout in a corner and calling that good. Here is a simple shelf layout switching plan closely based on a Mindheim design: Not an empire, but it allows quite a bit of switching, runaround moves, "sure spots", some yard work and interchange with other railroads. You only need 9 turnouts, bit of track, three buildings, one engine and maybe 20-30 or so freight cars. This could realistically be build by a cash strapped person in a realistic amount of time, and work well. And here the "wow" factor would be to super detail and weather your engine and cars, to scratch build or kit-bash the buildings, with all kinds of industrial details - air conditioners, ducts, electric wires etc, making the ground look realistic, with grass, shrubbery, a little discarded junk and what not. Your room sized plan - if you can't afford to spend $20 on a book, then you can't afford to build that. Sorry. Put that one on the back burner for 30 or 40 years or so, and get back to it when your own kids will be leaving for college Smile, Stein
I guess your right. Looking at his small layout that he has on his site, it is better to build a small layout rather than a bigger one. I may have to customize that track-plan a little bit, so I guess I should get that book. Thanks for showing me the light! I guess I will have to wait for later in life to build my dream layout.
Well, you can do a lot of different things with a small switching layout. The one I posted that was based on the Lance Mindheim plan is a layout that works very well for a modern industrial park, where there is some open room between the buildings. You can also go to the opposite extreme, and model a much more crowded scene (as long as you can reach everything, and you don't make switching hopeless). Here is my interpretation of a layout plan called "Ness Street Industries", designed by switching layout designer Shortliner Jack, with a small adaptation by Matt Goodman (Fluesheet of The Gauge): With this plan, the emphasis is on switching industries only. No yard - new cars arrive on your layout as a short inbound train of a switcher and four cars that start on the main (lower track right side). You got a total of ten places to spot inbound cars or pull outbound cars. But it is very small - it would fit in 8 feet of length, 15" of depth. Here is another couple of pretty small switching plans: This one is an old design of mine - I called it "Federal Street Overpass": In both H0 scale plans above, turnouts are Peco code 75. Short turnouts in Jack's plan up top, mediums in my plan below. Here is an N scale plan - a 8 x 1 foot N scale variant of Jonathan Jones 2x10 foot H0 scale layout "Mid-Atlantic and Western" from the May 2001 Model Railroader Magazine: Here is a link to Scot Osterweil's "Highland Park" 6x1 foot layout - a variant on Linn Westcott's classical "Switchman's nightmare": Here is a link to Rev Peter White's TIRR (Tenderfoot Industrial Railroad) - a 10 foot by 18" shelf layout with quite a bit of switching fun: Here is a link to Australian Model Railroader Professor Klyzr's amazing H0 scale 2x4 foot layout "Brooklyn 3am", from Carl Arendt's Micro Layout's site (http://www.carendt.com/): There are a lot of options for making pretty cool urban pretty small shelf layouts Well, I'll stop spamming you down with proposals now, and give you a chance to think about what you can do that is both within your current capabilities and that would be fun for you to build, detail and run. Smile, Stein
"Here is a link to Australian Model Railroader Professor Klyzr's amazing H0 scale 2x4 foot layout "Brooklyn 3am", from Carl Arendt's Micro Layout's site (http://www.carendt.com/)" This is one of the most amazing layouts I've ever seen in any scale.
All of these are great choices for a first layout. I really dig the "Federal Street Overpass". Don't get bogged down into thinking you've got to have trains run in circles to have fun so you don't have the space for a layout. You can do a switching layout and concetrate on operations, detailing, scenery and other aspects that will make the hobby enjoyable. Also, switching layouts are less expensive to get up and running. Good luck with the next step of figuring out which way you're going to go.
Thanks for all of the ideas! I will be getting Lance Mindheim's book soon, so in about a week or two I will have another plan for you guys to criticize. I am thinking of starting a blog to follow the progress of my layout. Has anybody else tried this? If so please tell me your experience with it.
After a long wait I finally got Lance Mindheim's book. I came up with this track-plan after spending about a day learning xtrkcad, I ran trains on it and I didn't encounter any problems with the track designs but I am sure you guys will find something that need fixing. I decided to build an 8x10 layout because I already have a 4x8 that I will be cutting in half. So here it is.
Looks good. I would perhaps re-consider that caboose track around the corner (or at least test it with your engine and cabooses) - curve looks a little too sharp curve for easy coupling when picking up a caboose. It could also be that cabooses doesn't make sense operationally on a layout this size - this will be an all switching layout, no room for running. Otherwise, it should work just fine. Good job! Smile, Stein
Hi Justin, I like the design, you did an outstanding job. You are a pretty fast learner too; only one day of practice?!! A couple of minor points: * you could add (removable) staging easily in the future; great. * the crossover at the top left is not really necessary now; with staging added you will be happy you've built it in. * the switchback in the yard is not labeled; what do you have in mind for the two spurs? *May be you could try out to rotate the main a bit, so a bit more tracks are not parallel to the walls or edge. *When you let the scrapyard(?) spur heading for the bottom too, you could create a scenery only part where the two legs meet. Don't mind my nitpicking, you made yourself a great plan Have fun with the build and the running. Paul BTW. when I was reading back through your thread, I remembered you inspired me to draw this urban switcher, also in Lance Mindheim style( I hope): I wanted to replace the peninsula from the bottom to the right wall of your room, but I forgot the plan; the peninsula could be made a foot longer that way. My feeling is you made the right decision to go for a smaller pike; bravo!
The Switchback in the yard was supposed to be a RIP track and a car-clean-out track I will be removing the crossover at the top in my next design, It was supposed to be there to allow the engine to switch places to the back of his train, but I realize that can be done already with the siding near the bottom. I hope to start construction in a few days, It will a few weeks until I can start track-work so I still have time to do changes with my track-plan.
Another Track-plan update.... I recently discovered that if I built my layout in an 8x10 L-shape; I would be blocking of one of the two doors in my train room, So I was forced to change my design once again... This new design allowed my to have room for a couple of staging tracks at the top, along with some scenery and an industry at the bottom. I had to shorten the yard a little bit but the staging tracks should make up for it. I almost like this design better than my last on, the few problems I have with this design are: The yard might be a little bit too short, and the track at the right are too close together. This should be my last design but I would still like some help with the problems mentioned above.
