I just finished the latest trackplan for my Paris & Mt. Pleasant RR (v. 3.0). Now under construction, it'll be about 9 1/2 by 5 feet, and go along two walls of our bedroom. It's a folded dogbone design, and will give me more running length. Go toParis and Mt. Pleasant trackplan, click on the link to the P&MtP page, and check out this N scale plan. I drew this using Atlas' Right Track Software system, mainly because it's free. Instead of using Atlas turnouts, I'm employing Pecos. All track is code 80- only because the code 55 wasn't available when I started, and ME's track, while nice, was a bit out of my price range. Feedback is appreciated, but keep in mind that due to an edict from the Bureau of Land Management (read: my wife) this is as big as it gets. [ 05 December 2001: Message edited by: friscobob ]</p>
Sorry. I get a note that said can't find your website Never mind. It is working now. Must be the storm we are having raising heck with the lines. [ 01 December 2001: Message edited by: Telegrapher ]</p>
Bob, Your layout plan looks good it gives the option of continuous running or switching. There is enough industry to keep it busy. I hope you will be posting regular updates
Looks good and I like your blurb on the avid model railroader... very good. You could some more switching on the left side of your layout, inside the loop, feeding an industry.
Thanks guys! Actually, I had thought of putting in a spur or two on the left side. I'm also gonna put a spur at about the middle, for loading pulpwood. This is in response to my purchasing some of Atlas' 40-foot pulpwood flatcars (in Frisco colors and lettering, of course ) The paper mill will be off-layout.
egg-cellent. The passing siding directly opposite the staging yard can be extended by swapping the right end siding switch with the industry switch. industries --------------- main \ ---------------- the siding / ---------/ [ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: yankinoz ]</p>
Funny you should mention that, Rob I've moved the siding to the left a bit, and added a switch leading off into the left side of the dogbone, with tracks branching off. I'm going to have some single track for scenic (read: wooded) effects. I've already made some more additions, subtractions and revisions- I hope to have plan version 3.01 posted to show you
Frisco, Refresh my memory, is the Grand Valley club the one who hosted the RMR convention about 3 years ago? I came over with our group The Trackers from Salt Lake, had a great time! Your link to Lobo Hobbies is no good, weren't they called Depot Trains? Does Eldon still run the place? Did they ever get the depot restored? Your layout plan looks good, look forward to seeing some construction shots. 2slim
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 2slim: Frisco, Refresh my memory, is the Grand Valley club the one who hosted the RMR convention about 3 years ago? I came over with our group The Trackers from Salt Lake, had a great time! Your link to Lobo Hobbies is no good, weren't they called Depot Trains? Does Eldon still run the place? Did they ever get the depot restored? Your layout plan looks good, look forward to seeing some construction shots. 2slim <hr></blockquote> That's right, the Grand Valley club DID host the RMR meet. I'm glad to hear you enjoyed it, and I wanna remind you of the club's swap meet in February 2002 (date TBA). Eldon sold out due to health reasons, and moved to Beaumont, TX. He sold the store inventory to the present owner of Lobo Mountain Trains (it's out on the I-70 business loop at 30 Road). I know the link is bad- Mike told me he's changing ISPs, and when I get his new address I'll post it as well. The depot is still under restoration. Our club now has its own building on the grounds of Cross Orchards Historical Farms, 3073 F Road. We built our own 30 by 60-foot buildind next to the gift shop, and we have our modular layout converted to a stationary layout. It's being readied for our annual Christmas show, starting Dec. 14.
Hmm.......I just looked at my layout, and it hit me- no yards! No engine facility, no interchange tracks (yet),just mainline running between two towns. What we have here is a running diorama! Now, some may find this a problem, but let's face it- yards are spaced out, and in most trackside towns you'll see just the mainline, a siding, and perhaps a spur or two. Since I have two towns, one at each end of the dogbone, I also have a bit of a mainline run (I'm thinking of putting in a bridge/trestle over the Sulphur River, which is between Bogota and Talco on US271). I'm also thinking of putting in a switch and a piece of track running off the edge of the layout (electrically dead to represent the Oklahoma, Red River & Texas line (the real OR&T ran between Deport and Blossom, TX, 1910-1912, but in my world it extends all the way north to Valliant, OK). Back to the drawing board.....
Update is posted- hit the link (found in my first post in this thread) and follow the signs. This revision includes reworked spurs, a relocated siding, and the addition of a bridge over the Sulphur River.
I have another suggestion. You could build a double decker, with 15 inches of seperation between the two decks, using a 2.5 grade. Because the grade would be in a "nolix" (no helix) in an oval, it wouldn't be as bad as 2.5 in a helix. At the far end, on your right is where you would build a mountainous region, in which track would need to go around 4 times. Maybe first time the track would be hidden. Second and third time, out in the open, and last time semi-hidden. This would give you more mainline along with a larger layout. The mountainous nolix area would be open so that you would see the trains running, much more so than if in a helix. They would disappear in the back but only for a short time. The 2.5 grade wouldn't be as severe as in a helix because the oval wouldn't put the same stresses on the flanges as a continous curve in a helix would.
Ya know, I mentioned that to the missus, and the (G-rated) response was NO , expressed in such a way as to make a Marine blush I like the concept, but again I have to deal with the local BLM. I may use that concept in a later incarnation, when I get more room (read: a separate room or building)
Come to think of it, the idea of a nolix is sellable to the BLM. She thought again about the idea, and decided as long as it didn't take up more floor space, it could work. Keep in mind that the area I'm modeling is northeastern Texas, and there are no mountains- a few rolling hills, some heavy wooded areas, but no severe vertical scenery. Unless I hid the "nolix" behind a backdrop, how would this work in my case?
The idea of nolix basically requires a large hill or mountains. But using the nolix could open your layout to other lines. What my son and I are doing is the bottom layout is one railroad, and the top deck is another RR. The RR are joined by the mountains nolix. So the bottom deck could be the RR of your choice, the link it either to another real RR or a freelance RR, which could act as a short line between your real RR and another RR. I don't know if you remember the Athabasca railroad featured in MR about a year or so ago (this is also where the idea of "nolix's" came from), but the Athasbasca RR was a short line, connecting between the CP and CNR in western Canada. My son and I are running two seperate railroads. This way you could have one RR and your wife could have another RR. You would be busy shipping stuff to each other, etc. With the nolix you could still do one section of your prototype, then open it up to something else, with the mountains as the divide.
Without mountains it can be done on a peninusla with a double sided backdrop - but this takes up more floor space than a helix (but offers zero hidden running.) If you simply want a lower level staging then it would be simple to drop the main to a lower level via a short visable run downhill to a turn back curve that drops behind the backdrop and then into hidden staging.
