Hi, just joined up! I'm just finishing up 1/3 of our basement that I dug out by hand and I get this room to play in. Concrete pad is poured, need to frame 1 and 1/2 wall and wallboard... In the meantime, I'm planning. Haven't done much modelling since a kid lo those many years ago but built and wired a lot of stuff at 1:1 scale. Here's the room, 1. plan view and elevation showing the constraints. Mainly the door, the couch and the pipe in the northwest corner. The couch would only be open if we need (another) spare bed... 2. The plan view with possible benchwork. 3. Just the benchwork. I put 30X30 triangle access in the west corners, since the pipe constrains one corner anyway and I ain't getting any younger. Mostly it's 30" maximum reach except into the back of the north east corner, and at one point on the 42X4'4" peninsula. I'm working with SCARM so will lay some test tracks next to see what fits but wonder if anyone has any thoughts on the general bench layout, esp. the 48" to the corner and the long reach at the peninsula? I'm thinking the window sill in the west (left) window can be incorporated as it won't open, the east window needs to open... I figure on using an office chair to roll around in rather than standing... Thanks!
Hi. Not sure what you're planning in that given space. But are you sure you want it to be N scale ? It looks like a huge area to work with and so you might be tempted to fill it with lots and lots of track going hither and dither and wind up with a problematic spaghetti bowl MRR. I'd say, if will be N, make use of more scenic, realistic landscaping instead of coagulated track work. Build a RR which employs real operations along the route instead of a roundy-round layout allowing trains to just meander in circles. Also, if you as yet have little or no N equipment, consider an HO layout where of course the RR will be smaller in actual trackage, but more easy to conduct ops at each spur or interchange (don't leave out an interchange of some configuration as it affords your line connection with the outside world of other lines/RRs. Also, though you wish to sit down you may wind up viewing trains from above which gives an unrealistic effect since in real life 97% of the time we view trains and track from the side, not from above or below. If you do accept standing, put benchwork up at about your chest and/or higher.Believe me, you're going to be getting up and down frequently anyway. Finally, I'd hope you start right out with DCC control; much simpler to wire up and affords great sounds and lighting control from the locos and many other devices... I hope I haven't insulted your intelligence thus far. Good luck.....Mark
Nice amount of space that you can fit a huge N scale layout in; plus some. Can't wait to see what you end up doing. And of course welcome to Trainboard
Thanks Mark. I'm not sure intelligence is something I can claim at this point, anyroad ;-). Really appreciate your thoughts. I do have N Scale equipment so am committed, gulp. But yes, definitely DCC. I definitely get your point about hither and yon spaghetti. When I laid out the potential benchwork, I figured to maximize what was available and then reduce accordingly if operations/industries permit. I think the shelf on along the north wall could be narrower to provide more focused landscaping and other areas could be cut back to provide more interesting rounding rather than all straight lines and sharp angles... Here's a layout that probably commits all your listed sins... I wasn't figuring any of this would be likely to end up in the final version, just experimenting with the general idea and heights. Get a general idea of the mainline and branches and add spurs and focal points as I go. I do like the idea of a longish run to actually get somewhere. Starting at the dock at Union Bay moving through the industrial area, with a branch at 0 elevation to Nanaimo Flats, starting to climb up and crossing Stoney Creek and up into the mountains at Selkirk. Doubling back and crossing Stoney Creek on the inaptly (and not long to remain) named Avatar Bridge back through the industrial area and into Union Heights. I'm totally open to the idea that none of this makes any sense whatsoever. I spent 20 years in the merchant marine and the last 20 as a land use planner, haven't spent much time thinking about train transportation. I figured on lots of marine themed parts though with a fair amount of the front edge being waterfront. Nanaimo Flats could be an interchange area. Here's a pic of not-quite-an-interchange. Things I'd like to incorporate: Where I live is up and down and a hundred years ago there was a lot of railway logging. I remember a lot of wooden trestles, often long runs over valleys to maintain elevation. So long wooden trestles. I'm figuring late 1950's Canadian Pacific so wooden trestles would still be in use and steam engines. I'd like to get one big steam locomotive, partly to justify the huge 130' turntable I have but also 'cause they are so amazing. I'm figuring on 18" curves for the mainline for this, but I wonder if I could get away with 12" on the Selkirk curve... That's one part of this first experiment I'm not too fussy about. For some odd reason I like embankments so cut stone retaining walls where the tracks run close together. I'm not figuring on being prototypical, just whatever takes my fancy, within reason though... Any thoughts gratefully accepted...
Welcome to TrainBoard. Nice drawings of your possible layout footprint and the available space. And you've started to bring us to the "ball park" on what you'd like your layout to represent: possibly, a 1950s/transition era RR that might have a branchline coming from a logging camp(s) down to a mainline near waterfront/urban/yard scenes. As this thread develops, I'm sure this initial concept will undergo a lot of changes as you clarify your vision of what you want, set up your priorities, and then begin the work of translating the ideas in your head into a reality in your train room. It is sometimes helpful to develop a list of your needs and wants for your layout, the Givens and the Druthers. Givens are the "fixed" needs that you absolutely must include in your dream layout. Some of the Givens for your layout might include your scale (N), era (1950s), and RR (CP). Givens may include minimum radii, or maximum grades; some people will list signature features or structures of a prototype they "must" include on their layout. If you feel strongly enough about them, you could list specific locations (Union, Selkirk), or features (Avatar Bridge over Stoney Creek, trestles, retaining walls) that you definitely want to include on your layout. Also layout shelf height that could accommodate operators sitting in wheeled chairs. Trainroom Givens might include location of all walls, doors (and which way they open), windows/light switches/heating-cooling vents/electric panels/closets (and their doors)/etc. that can't be blocked by layout benchwork or backdrops, maximum shelf depth, location of any existing benchwork you don't want to move, and non-layout related traffic areas/space/furniture/appliances that are non-negotiable (cannot be moved, violated, intruded upon, blocked), such as always leaving access to a hide-a-bed. Druthers are all the elements or conditions you would like to include on your layout, if possible, but they have a lower priority than givens... so you would rather have them ('druther have them) if you can, but you could tolerate not having them, if you had to. Druthers you've already mentioned include avoiding longer reaches; and there are probably some marine theme elements that you will list under Druthers (and others you might want to list as Givens because they are a higher priority for you). Other Druthers might include: ideal versus acceptable aisle widths near the doorway, ideal versus acceptable layout aisle widths at other places on the layout; benchwork depth (which will interact with aisle width, especially if there is an upper deck to this layout), and preferred footprint of benchwork within the trainroom (around the room-donut, island, only along one or two walls, or extending into the room with peninsulas). Do you want a train running from Point A to Point B to only go through a scene one time? or is it okay to go left to right at the front of the layout and right to left at the back? Even if you are going dcc (supposedly, a simpler way of wiring a layout), you may want to carefully consider what your preferred shelf level may be...(30 to 36 inches may be great for working from a chair, but wiring (and subsequently, repairing or troubleshooting) under a 42 to 48 inch high shelf is MUCH easier than a 30 to 36 inch high shelf. Share your Givens and Druthers with us (yes, it is very likely that what you post this week will change next week; but, over time, your lists will become more firm and [with your feedback on our posts] will help us offer better comments, ideas, and caveats). It would also be helpful to us, if you could let us know what aspects of model RRing are especially appealing to you. 1. For example, do you like to do a lot of switching of cars in industries or yards (so a good track plan would have lots of industries and/or yards for spotting/classifying cars). Or would you rather run a train from point A to point B with little or no switching along the way (so a good track plan would have more yards with tracks for arriving/departing trains or classifying cars, but fewer industries)? Or do you enjoy trains most when they run continuously on a loop and require little or no intervention from you (so a good track plan would have a long run (or loop) and fewer yards/industries? ---When your preferences are not 0%/100%, indicate approximations 70/30, 5o/50, 20/30/50. 2. Do you plan to operate the layout primarily by yourself? Or will there frequently be other operators routinely running trains at the same time on your layout? (affects positioning of towns/industries/yards so operators working at the front of the shelf do not interfere with operators at the back of the shelf.) Since the primary operator will be seated most of the time, fewer cars should be deliberately spotted at the back of a shelf, that is, a good track plan will have fewer industries, yards, or interchanges at the back of the shelf. If there will frequently be multiple operators on the layout, and many operators will be standing instead of seated, if would be possible for a good track plan to include more industries/yards/interchanges near the back of the shelf where a standing operator would be able to reach or see much more easily than one who is always seated. 3. Do you plan to take a lot of pictures of trains on your layout? If so, any track plan should have at least 5 to 7 inches of scenery in front of the track, so you can take pictures without having to worry about the fascia board showing. (At several places on my layout, I can only get decent pics if I put up some temporary scenery to hide or disguise the front edge of the shelf.) 4. Do you plan to provide lots of animation or special lighting effects in structures on your layout (so a good track plan would need to provide lots of space for structures)? 5. Besides mountains, trestles, a creek, and water fronts, are there particular aspects of scenery you would like to focus on or showcase, such as, structures vs landscapes, or urban vs rural, industrial vs residential vs commercial? In a good track plan, the proportion of certain aspects found on your layout will proportionately reflect the relative strength of your various preferences. 6. Do you plan to have lots of tunnels (i.e., trains running under scenery) to hide a second track going through a scene, or would you prefer using hills/mountains and trees or structures to hide the second track (i.e., trains running behind scenery) (affects ease of maintenance of the hidden track, and how close the hidden track can be to the visible track).
Welcome! I suggest as you draw your plans, also get some spare track/ turnouts/ engines/ cars to lay out in any proposed space. Sheets of cardboard work great as a temporary benchwork/ roadbed. Check alignments and space usage. I found that I could reduce my benchwork depth to 12-14 inches on my N-scale layout and still have plenty of room for track and scenery. More is not always better. Don't set your benchwork shape and height before doing some mock-ups. It's not easy to adjust an entire layout's height after you've built it. Ask me how I know. Enjoy the process. Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk
Wow, thanks for all the great info, pointers, guidelines, etc. I'm thinking it would be best to respond in a few posts to separate out the feedback/discussion... This one is overarching issues. Next will be room/space and general benchwork Third will be general layout I'm a cartographer by inclination and do land use planning/GIS for my sins. I was thinking about this from the land use planning perspective and in terms of working from generalities to specifics (also reflected in my 3 proposed discussion threads) so: Vision To have a fun, engrossing hobby that I can pick up and put down as time and inclinations permit. I've spent a bit of time thinking through objectives and strategies but won't get into them, but the some of the givens fit here Givens N Scale - oddly enough I tend to like leetle leetle things. Best utilization of the space, doesn't mean filling with benchwork Planning before performing (but I'm sympathizing with the vultures wanting to kill something, I'm getting to "to heck with planning, I'm going to build something/lay some track!", so will soon indulge) CPR late 50's, early 60's Use prototypes as guidelines but generally laissez faire btw, I'm David Scott, but given of the three responses there's already a Dave and a David, I think for trains I'm Scott, and I'm a stubborn son-of-a-Scott. On to room/space and general benchwork...
Room/space and general benchwork: Previous given: Best utilization of the space, doesn't mean filling with benchwork Additional: I can do any damn thing I want in this room (no attitude here). It's only roughed in at present so I'm probably 6 months away from starting benchwork. The walls, windows, the closet where the couch will sit, the door and walls are fixed Questions related to the attached file "north west corner room 8-5X19.pdf" Base Height Given: 0" base height will be sea level. Given: One section will have a canyon/valley below base height (but the illusion will be it is in the hills) I've been thinking base height will be 33" because of the window sill if I'm sitting down, and I'm thinking of sitting down because I'm a spritely 64 but 74 and 84 don't seem so far away any more. I haven't searched the forums for discussion on this aspect but I'm sure there's discussion in there somewhere. I take the point of 33" as being low to work under. I've wired boats so no stranger to contortions for wiring, but that too will become increasingly challenging. Having a higher base height though raises the question of whether I'll want to stand for very long, not my favourite even now. Are there rolling chairs that could be used at a higher layout? I'm average height, 5'10", so if I did go for the higher format, is there a generally accepted average height for standing-level layouts? If I use the northeast corner as a mountainous area with a return loop as I'll show in the layout post, I presume this means a tunnel for the track in the corner, capped by liftout landscape, i.e. mountain? One of the advantages of the depth is the mountain will create a fairly generous space to get under to get at the track? The pipe in the northwest corner is a given and I've dealt with it with an access triangle 30"X 30" as shown. Does this make sense? Ditto the southwest corner. 30"X30" is pretty generous for my slight frame. I read some of the posts on access holes but they were referencing rectangular ones... I looked up minimum clearances around beds and 30" is what I used here, for the foot of the bed when the couch is open, and at the peninsula. I'm thinking this is overly generous, as the bed will be so rarely used and as the clearance on the east side will be maintained because of the door, I could probably get away with less at the foot. Open to suggestions. My general way of working on this kind of thing is define the extreme and work back from there. The grey area for benchwork on the floor reflects this approach with the above questions maybe indicating some additional areas. Cutting back/reducing gets to the layout plan and the next post. (later) Thanks again! Scott
Somewhat more on the layout: Attached is an Adobe Illustrator modified SCARM layout. The track location is still notional, but where it comes from/gets to is starting to get some clarity. Some of the general layout points: 1. Mainly just myself and maybe occasionally another, probably not an experienced railroader. 2. Not too interested in pictures and could probably photoshop the foreground if necessary. 3. Not too interested in animation or special lighting but definitely lit buildings, streets, industries for nighttime running. (is this special lighting? I'm thinking it's "ordinary", but maybe that's what you meant.) 4. I have a 42" plotter, so will have the luxury of printing out the layout at 1:1 scale. I'll probably do prints at 1/4 scale (1/640 model scale?) first and mock up the elevations in cardboard so I have a better sense of how it will look and work. I'm attaching east and west views of SCARM 3d output. (I'm crap at the terrain in SCARM as you'll see) I've attempted to show by colouring the bench what operations appeal to me, which at this point is pretty much a mix. Givens on the overall layout, (more like a given in a brainstorming sense, could all change, but I'm liking what I see): 5. point to loop to point on the mainline, starting at 0 elevation at the dock at Union Bay through the industrial and urban area of Squalicum. Transitioning to 1.5% grade for the long run to Selkirk Mountain. Pockets of industry along the way. Pick up extra power for the 2% grade around the mountain. Drop off the extra power and back to 1.5% grade. Across Avatar Bridge (I'm starting to like that name) and into the upper elevations of Squalicum urban and then industrial/warehousing. Dropping to 0% grade at 7.28" elevation to the viaduct across the rest of the industrial area into the yards and maintenance area of Union Heights. 6. Passenger station at Union Heights linked to the passenger terminal on the bay. 7. As you'll see from the document I'm posting (is it easiest if I post PDFs, or should I paste directly into the conversation? Also, is it OK to use images from Model Railroader and other sources. I've tried to maintain attributions...) I have a lot if interest in timbered trestles and hope to use various versions of trestles here on Vancouver Island. 8. I love buildings utilizing big timbers and there's a couple of wooden WWII hangars still in use on the Island. One of them is a float plane base and I'd like to model it. 8. Have avoided tunnels as much as possible. I'm thinking Selkirk Mountain can be high enough that there will be space underneath to (relatively) easily access the hidden track. Parts of the Union Bay yard may need to extend under Union Heights... 8. I have a small urban area to provide the notion of connection to urban areas, but it's not a prime interest. I like the notion of the seedy part of town adjacent to, and transitioning into, industry. 9. I show a fishing village with cannery at the foot of Selkirk Mountain. I'll mockup the mountain in 1/4 scale as well to get a sense if the cannery would fit here, or if it would be to much of an abrupt transition. Interested in anyone's thoughts on that. Questions (well some of them anyway) Do the two sidings for locomotives waiting to assist on Selkirk mountain make sense? What's a reasonable length train for this layout? I'd like to run a few that are as long as possible and figure I need a passing siding, I'm thinking on the lower part of the mainline between the bridge and the tunnel so wondering how long it would need to be. I guess it really only needs to be long enough to accommodate the second longest train... A million more, but I'll leave this for now. Cheers Scott
I agree that Murphy bed clearances can be less than 30"...assuming those using the bed will be staying for only a couple days at a time (and they will socialize with others in another part of the house instead of in their bedroom). When the bed is "up" out of the way, there will also need to be someplace to keep suitcases/garment bags/dirty clothes bag/toiletries, etc out of the train aisles...because there will be a high probability that while company is there, you'll want to show off your RR empire. Regarding wheeled chairs or stools: I have 3 wheeled stools and a wheeled office chair in my trainroom. Of the 4, only 1 of the wheeled stools (an ancient dentist's stool that I got 30 years ago at a garage sale) will raise up far enough that I can use it to reach comfortably to the back of my 48 inch elevation deck (but I still have to be very careful about bumping structures and rolling stock with my elbow). The other wheeled stools and chair are fine for working at 29 to 32 inch high desks or tables, or 30 and 36 inch elevation layout decks. The 2 stools that raise or lower by spinning the seat up or down on a central screw raise the seat the highest (18 to 28 inches and 18 to 24 inches); the pneumatic cylinders for the remaining stool and the office chair only raise or lower the seat between 15 and 21 inches and 15 and 20 inches. You may want to investigate how tight your curve radii can be for your "one big steam locomotive". Most of my experience has been with 2 axle GP trucks and 3 axle SD trucks, but I suspect an 0-4-0 can probably negotiate a 12 to 14 inch curve. When you have 6 drivers, you may experience some binding on 14 to 16 inch radius curves; and my guess is that 8 drivers would prove problematic on 18 to 20 inch radius curves. It is likely that pulling longer trains around level curves or pulling trains up curving grades will adversely affect a locomotive's pulling power, and this would be in addition to any reduction in pulling power caused by binding drivers. FYI, the amount of binding that occurs for the same number of drivers may vary considerably from model to model (and also within the same model when wheels are at the narrower or wider end of acceptable gauge. N-scalers with experience running steam locos of specific brands (Atlas, Broadway Limited, etc) and wheel configurations (2-8-4, 2-6-2, etc) on 2% grades and curves of various minimum radius, please weigh in on the binding drivers issue. Setting the "proper" number of cars/train for a specific layout is largely subjective, and will be influenced by a variety of factors. Like the prototype RRs, the number of cars in a model train can be affected by the era, the type of RR (logging, terminal, Class I, industrial, etc), pulling power of a specific loco (or locos), a ruling grade, or the amount of traffic routinely moving between two destinations on your layout. Modelers will often limit length of a train so that when switching cars at the front of the train into industries in one town, the caboose is not still in the previous town. If you plan to only switch cars in yards or industries at either end of the layout (and not anywhere between) then longer trains will be possible...but you still may want to limit train length so that, as your train moves through the various scenes from one end of the layout to the other, it does not completely fill two adjacent scenes at the same time. At the other end of the train length spectrum, you may want to set a minimum train length so that a large scene (perhaps the river valley with the Stoney Creek Bridge and dam) doesn't accent how few cars are in the train...although, if you want to show the vastness of a mid-west prairie, running a 6 foot long train through a 12 foot wide prairie scene is a good way of doing it. Some modelers will arrange their scenery so that hills, trees, structures, or tunnels frame various scenes by hiding part of the train. This fosters the illusion that the layout is bigger than it actually is, because a viewer is never able to see the entire train at once. Obviously, the success of this illusion relies on cleverly balancing scene length with train length.
Thanks Dave. But you can get to the back of the 48"? I was assuming it would be too far nohow... How high is your lower and upper decks? Minimum radius is governed by the 48" corner and to some extent the wyes at Union Bay and Heights. The room would accommodate deeper, > 48", but how to access. Maybe I should go deeper and figure an access hatch more in the middle. I guess it relates to the ultimate height of the deck, but I'm wondering if the mountain could be more in the foreground so an access hole could be behind it... Good points on min. and max. train lengths, will look at the layout from that perspective once the general areas are more fleshed in. Cheers Scott
I found the couch-hide-a-bed too restrictive so figure it can go somewhere else. Here's a radical departure on the possible benchwork. Nowhere on here is less than 30" from access, and the aisles are 24". Same as before, the as-built benchwork will be adapted to the actual layout. This version gives a much better, bigger peninsula... I made access holes instead of corners, as I realized the corners would be difficult with background panels... A little further on with givens/druthers: CPR 1955-60, freelance mainly one person operator operations roughly equally split between long runs, making up, servicing industries mostly diesel ops with 1 remaining large streamer generally seedy/rundown, seen better days point to point with a loop in the middle. points have wyes, yards 130' turntable with 3 stall roundhouse, maintenance yard for steam and diesel ends are at two levels, close enough in height that they share a passenger terminus on the waterfront of the lower level, similar to this '20s pic of Vancouver. (i.e. a viaduct connector) pier/dock has passenger terminus on 1 side, freight and cranes on the other 6 car float at the end of a long wooden trestle waterfront industries, cannery fishbuyer connected by rail to fishmarket/shipper in town float plane wharf and hangar 13. industry/ warehouse building canyon with in-street switching 14. small downtown type urban area with much larger area suggested as backdrop 15. steel avatar bridge 16. mostly remainder bridges are wooden, 4 or 5 Druthers I'm imagining some of the previous may end up as druthers as the magnitude of the previous becomes a reality as opposed to brainstorming, but anyway: cement works sawmill with booming ground bascule bridge I better stop planning and get building ( I wish)!
Scott: Depending on which part of the basement it's in, about half of the lower deck of my N-scale layout is 48 inches elevation from the floor, the other half is 53 inches above the floor, and the upper deck is 64 or 65 inches from the floor. I have 12 inch high step-up benches and raised floor sections in aisles to reach the upper deck. Standing on the benches, operators are working on layout shelves that are functionally 36 and 53 inches high. The depth of the lower deck shelf from fascia to backdrop varies from 12 to 37 inches. If I sit on the 28 inch high wheeled stool (on the floor, not on the raised floor or any of the benches) my arm can extend about 24 inches toward the backdrop, but I need to work cautiously because the underside of my arm just barely clears the top of trees, rolling stock, and structures. If I'm standing, I can reach farther...but my standing reach toward the back of the lower shelf is sometimes limited by depth and thickness of the upper deck, as well as, the positioning of the L-girder that supports the stringers of the upper deck. On my lower deck, the coved backdrops of my corners vary from 24 to 42 inches to the fascia. The shelf on either side of the 42 inch deep corner is 36 inches deep, and the mainline tracks entering the corner were 24 and 22 inches from the fascia on one side and 35 and 33 inches on the other side. The very long reach into this deep corner was very inconvenient, but when building this in 2003 with a 53 y/o body, I viewed it as an acceptable trade off which allowed me to model how the mainline tracks were separated (hidden) from the industrial tracks by trees, just like on the prototype. But my soon to be 67 y/o body recently developed neck/back/shoulder pain that prompted me to re-prioritize modeling the prototype exactly in this deep corner...so last week I eliminated the trees and re-routed the mainline tracks closer to the industrial tracks, and now I only have to reach 22 and 24 inches to the mainline tracks in the corner and to the right of the corner, and only 28 and 30 inches from the fascia to the deepest tracks on the shelf to the left of the corner. This is still a long reach; but, because the shelves are not as deep as they get farther from the corner, there is only about 6 inches of track that is more than 28 inches from the front fascia, and only about 3.5 feet of track that is between 24 and 28 inches from the front fascia...a big improvement from the 10 feet of track that was over 28 inches from the fascia before my recent changes. On your most recently posted track plan, how big are your corner access holes? For what it's worth...I have 4 bowl-shaped helixes on my layout; the smallest pop up access is 19 x 23 inches and the largest is 25 by 26 inches. How do you plan to get to your pop up corner access holes? For all 4 of the helixes, the underside of the lower deck and helix benchwork is 42 inches, so I can duck walk into a helix (except when my knees are stiff from being outside in the cold of winter), crawl in and push myself up on the step stool I leave in each of the helixes (so I can stand on them and reach onto the top deck from within each of the helixes), or sit on a wheeled stool, bend over so my head clears the supports, and scoot myself into the helix. Another FWIW: The smallest loop in each bowl has a minimum of 32 inches diameter, but I have deliberately left a smaller access hole so I have a 6 inch lip on one or two sides of the access hole on which to set tools, materials, throttles, etc when I have to work inside the helix.
Thanks Dave. The access holes are about the same as your smallest, would you recommend bigger, e.g. more like your larger? I feel you with the 67 yo bod. 64 is just starting to make it's limitations known... I haven't thought much about getting under there, I've done a lot of work in situations where contortions were necessary, but you're right I better be thinking that way. From your description, you are accessing the 48" level from a 28" high chair? My office chairs go about 22" high, is your chair unusual, or if I look around is 28" fairly common? RU doing hand switching and therefore need to reach back there regularly? Or is there more to do regularly than I'm thinking? Cheers Scott
Access hole dimensions will be closely tied to the size of your shoulders and trunk, the flexibility of your back, hips, and knees, and the strength of your legs as you stand up after crawling on knees or duck-walking under the lower deck. Be aware that most of us assist our legs by pushing on a stool or pulling on the inside lip of the access hole, so plan your benchwork to have some convenient handholds and to be strong enough to tolerate this extra pulling/tugging. Set up a sample access hole (and the appropriate width of shelf to crawl under), and see how much space you will need (then give yourself an extra few inches). Note, too, that your sample access hole will need to take into account the thickness of the shelf (that is, the surface of the shelf may be 48 inches, but the underside may only be 42" (my lower shelf is 6 inches thick: 1/2 inch Homasote, 1/2 inch OSB panel or plywood, 1x2 stringer (about 1.5 inches), and a 1x4 L-girder (about 3.5"). When running trains, I walk along with my train as it progresses over the layout; and because there are operators working trains on 2 different levels as well as on both sides of the aisles (and the narrow aisles often have step-up benches in them for easier access to the upper level), none of us work the N-scale trains from a wheeled stool or chair. I do, however, run the HO switching layout from a wheeled stool (but it is located along a 16 ft aisle under the lower level at 30 inches elevations from the floor, and there are only 2 N-scale trains that use the decks above it, so one N-scale train is run before the HO switching layout is run, and the other N-scale train is run after. When I am doing maintenance or repairs (or rearranging track configurations), I usually work on the 48" level from a standing position because I can reach deeper into the shelf, although doing some recent work I spun the dentist's stool up to it's full height (28") to sit while working at the front edge of the shelf, and spun it all the way down when working the front of the shelf where the floor is raised 12". The dentist's stool was old (antique-ish?) when I got it at a garage sale in the 1980s. The office chair by my dispatcher's desk and the 2 newer wheeled stools have pneumatic pistons which only allow height adjustments of 6 inches or less, and the 2 older wheeled stools spin up or down on a central screw to raise or lower the seat through a much larger range. The dentist's stool is the only one of all the wheeled stools or wheeled office chairs I've ever owned that goes up to 28"...so my guess is that it's rare. For the 2 mainlines that were so far toward the back of the shelf in the 42 inch coved corner, I had 3 turnouts that were controlled by stationary decoder-driven Tortoises (with optional toggle switch activation in the fascia). When I recently shifted the tracks away from the back of the shelf, I used ground throws to activate the turnouts in their new locations. I have over 800 turnouts on my layout. Currently, about 60 of them that are harder to reach (located toward the back of shelves or inside a helix) have Tortoises driven by stationary decoders and either fascia mounted push buttons or fascia mounted toggle switches, and there are 3 Tortoises that have toggle switch controls, but no stationary decoders. The remaining 750+ turnouts are moved by ground throws. One of my projects to be completed in the next year or so (hopefully), is to replace ground throws with stationary decoder-driven Tortoises for about 60 turnouts along my mainlines, even when the turnouts are easily reached from an aisle, because I want to have my Dispatchers setting up more of the routes, especially for less experienced operators who do not know the routes as well. I also plan to replace all existing toggles with push buttons so the Dispatcher will be able to know which way a switch is thrown, even if the Dispatcher is in a different room than the turnout.
Thanks Dave I envy your dentists chair, but covet not your neighbour's chair I guess... I am convinced to go higher, thinking 45" works for my average 5'9" height. Good points on the "assists", it's only in the last few years I haven't been able to do squats and I'll spend some time with a mockup access hole when I get further along. Here's my latest thinking. It occurred to me the much bigger peninsula gave the possibility of doing a more gradual curve with Selkirk Mountain on it. Avatar bridge would be on the side facing the door. I like the idea of an immediate focal point that draws the eye and some of the layout will be "behind" the mountain for a gradual "reveal". I removed the southwest corner access, realized it wasn't giving me much. Moved the northeast access against the wall so my back will be against the backdrop as I don't need the loop to go into the corner. The biggest challenge with this version are the wyes at Nanaimo Flats and Nanaimo Heights. Obviously a lot more track work to do, but I'm liking this version. I'm about 50-50 on the two versions, I'm losing waterfront with this version. Union is a hodgepodge of track at this point, but some buildings will give it some definition. I'm attaching clips of two old HO track plans I scaled down and loosely used as guides. I like the idea of crossing tracks and this certainly fullfills this. Updates to Givens/Druthers With this layout I sacrificed some waterfront industries, so these get downgraded to Druthers: 6 car float at the end of a long wooden trestle waterfront industries, cannery fishbuyer connected by rail to fishmarket/shipper in town I was still hopeful with the previous version that I'd fit these in so tomorrow I'll probably go back to it with some of the ideas I've incorporated into this one... Adding to Givens: Remote switching for most/all of the layout. I've been presuming these would be toggle switches on the fascia but I need to spend some time looking at having DCC control with the possibility of computer control in the future... Something else to bone up on! Cheers Scott
Back to having the peninsula being two heights of the end points. I think the benchwork on this might be getting there. 24" isles, 30" max shelf with track > 4" from the back, 18" minimum curve on the mainline
When you get to the point of refining the track configuration "hodgepodge" at Union, be sure to include a run-around track that was probably cropped out of the inserted image. Union will sort of have the flavor of John Allen's Time Saver switching puzzle, but I would encourage you to provide enough length in your spurs and run-around so the default status permits efficient switching of the complex track work at Union...and only set temporary restrictions on using the full length of spurs when you want to have an extra challenging (frustrating) switching session at Union. Visiting operators will thank you. Will the turntable and the turning wye south and east of Union (in the layout footprint) be on the same level (duplicate functions), or different levels...are both absolutely necessary? And will there be a classification yard or small satellite yard in that area, too, on one level or the other? You may want to prioritize the features you want in that area, so you know what will need to be dropped first to have enough space for the more preferred features or operational aspects. To keep Union switching operations moving smoothly, you will probably want a yard big enough to hold at least twice the number of cars that you will be setting out in the Union industries and long enough to accommodate your longest train. And it will need to hold twice as many cars, if you plan to originate/terminate a second train there. That section of the layout may be very crowded.
Thanks Dave. Well, at least you didn't say it was completely crazy (even if you thought it!) I'm back to having the peninsula being two level ending points with the mountain loop in north east. Do you think the helpers stationed on sidings before the Selkirk grade change to 2% make sense? If so, I'm wondering if actually changing the grade would make any difference, probably not visually at this scale. I'm wondering if I could have it as an operational requirement but not actually change the grade? You can see from the latest benchwork that I figured out I can move the door and wall back flush with the back of the eventual closet, gaining another 2' in the southeast behind the door. I'm figuring on having both the smaller (manual) turntable and a wye at what is now Butedale - with the extra 2' of the yard behind the door, things start to fit a lot better. The Port Angeles layout did have a runaround, and the Union Freight had with the double track and cross overs. Once I double back up the track both will be built back in. "enough length in spurs" - for the power and at least one boxcar I'm presuming or do you mean just the boxcar well clear of anything passing? I was figuring I'd have both the turntable and a wye on the same level on the peninsula, but the wye quickly gets problematic, so I'll use the turntable on the lower level at Union and no wye. I can run the off leg of the wye on the upper level (Union Heights) into the non-existing closet as shown. I think this general layout is a given now... Still playing with the orientation of the pier at Union. Still trying to figure out a passenger station that can service both levels and the pier. I'm thinking it requires both tracks to be coming from the same direction (in this version shows at 90 deg. so working on that next. Cheers David
Well so much for the general layout as a given. Since raising to 45", and already having two duck-unders, I've put the access back in the southwest corner...
