Designing My HO-Scale Room Layout

[Justinmiller171]

I just thought I would share a few links for a few track-plans that Inspired me, The first two were recommended to me almost a year ago when I was overly ambitious, now that I have some experience, and I have plenty of track, I think these are in my skill range.

The first is an urban switching layout designed by our very own Steinjr: http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/pp124...stin01.jpg

The Seconed is from Paulus_Jas from Trainboard: http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af19/...0urban.jpg

The Third is another from Steinjr, this is a smaller version of Model Railroader's MR&T Troy Branch Layout: http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/pp124.../mrt01.jpg

[Justinmiller171]

I went back out to the layout I bought to Inspect it again and I discovered that the turnouts are Atlas Snap-switches( although they might be #4's). This is okay since I have been wanting to build an "old-school layout", this means focusing on the scenery and train running rather that realism like many of the layouts today, The Miami switching layout I am currently building will fulfill my needs for realism and I still have that craving for scenery and train running, I have found a few layouts that may fit my needs:

The first is that layout described in Building a ready to run railroad:http://books.google.com/books?id=iIjwUDU...CC8Q6AEwAg

Another is the layout in this how-to book:http://www.amazon.com/Railroad-Start-Fin...d_sim_b_25

I would like to have an around the room layout( like I original planned on) but with snap-switches it just doesn't seem right

I want this layout to be more about scenery and photography rather than realistic Operation(Although I do want a few spurs to give it some lasting interest.

[ocalicreek]

The Miami switching layout I am currently building will fulfill my needs for realism and I still have that craving for scenery and train running...

Why not design a layout that meets both needs, and is in your room? Make an honest list of what you like (and dislike) about the Miami layout, and do the same for the other layouts that catch your eye. After a while you'll develop a better idea of what you really want.

Only then, after you have done that armchair homework, should you break out the planning paper and follow some good advice that was passed on to me here at The Gauge - make two plans (at least). The first should pack in as much track and as many scenes as possible - cram it in. The second should be as sparse and minimalist as possible. If you want, make one plan that focuses on operation to the extreme, or another that's 90% scenic with very little ops. You get the idea.

Then you may arrive at a plan somewhere in between one extreme or the other (or you may like one of the extremes - great!) Even that plan will not satisfy you unless you commit to it fully and build it. As you are building it you can make small changes here and there but you should stick with the concept as much as you are able. Commit to the vision of what you'd like to see, how you'd like to run trains, etc. Imagine what that will feel like and how you'll feel when it's completed.

Don't listen to the fairy tale nonsense that model railroads are never really finished. Life is too short for unfinished railroads. Even the great John Allen made comments wondering whether his Gorre & Daphetid was too much railroad for one man, and tragically he died before the golden spike was driven. But his first layout was smaller than a 4x8 and was so well planned and completed to such a degree that it made it into G&D #2, then the most famous G&D #3. Each time it was slightly modified to fit the new plan, but his overall concept was so well defined that very little had to change unless he wanted it to.

Download a copy of Frank Ellison's 'The Art of Model Railroading' (You may have to join the Delta Lines Yahoo Group to get it) and read that. If you want an 'old school' operating railroad, there's the place to start. He was a pioneer operator with some pretty unique ideas about scenery, structures, time, the whole shootin match.

And if you want to ignore any or every part of what I've written that's fine too - I won't be offended. This is a hobby, afterall, and we are free to do as we please (since it should be pleasing, I think). But I get the feeling from reading your posts that you're still searching for something in this hobby to scratch the right itch, so I thought I'd give a bit more direction if you're willing to take it. Planning is a whole lot cheaper than building, and if reading a few dusty old lines only serves to help you figure out what you don't want then that's progress too.

Galen

[Russ Bellinis]

Justin, are there any model railroad clubs in Paradise or in a nearby town? I toyed with all sorts of track plans and finally started to build something in a one car garage that had no street access in my last house before we moved to the current one. After moving, I tried to find a place for my model railroad without success, but was able to join a modular club. I discovered where my interests lie by trying different types of train running in the club, and it changed the direction of my modeling interests completely and also helped me to focus on what I would consider to important aspects of a railroad that I would build for myself.

[Justinmiller171]

Russ, There is club in a nearby town, and I visit there regularly, Even though I am not a member they still like to have me run trains on the layout. That is where I discovered that I was more interested in train-running than operation. Last week there was problem with power going to a section of the layout, so the train could only move about the yard and even running the train back in forth was fun.

Here is another Track-plan I came up with:

[Justinmiller171]

I've been looking through my collection of Model railroad reading materials and Have read two articles in particular that really inspired my newest design. The first is from Model Railroad Planning 2008, it was the article on John Allen's first Gorre & Daphetid, It explained how he built it so it could be expanded upon later. next was an article from the booklet that came with Model railroad planning 2010, it was an article by Iain Rice on building Sectional Layouts and that got me thinking, I will be moving out to go to collage in a few years and it would be really nice to build a layout that I could bring with me, I might only be able to bring a couple of sections with me, but I can save the rest for later in life when I build my "Dream Layout". There are also alot of other perks to building sectional Layouts, such as the ability to bring the sections with me on vacations to work on in my spare time, I am also interested in Model Railroad Photography and Sectional Layouts are great for outdoor photography.

And Here is my latest design...


I will be using a 4x6 for the main section of the layout( A 4x8 would be much to cumbersome to work on), there are 5 2x4 sections and one 2x6 section with is based on a design by Bryon Henderson:http://www.layoutvision.com/gallery/id22.html

Many of the 2x4's are scenery only, these will be useful in making the layout seem bigger than it really is, and they should be really easy to build

[shortliner]

Justin - if you are going to be moving out to go to college in a few years, I think you need to look at the planning from a different perspective. 1.The layout needs to be easily transportable 2. It needs to be either modular or foldable 3. It is unlikely that anything you build now will fit in your college dorm room 4.Between now and when you finish college your plans, skills and interests are going to change ENORMOUSLY!

My suggestion is that you either build a small transportable layout, and use it to practice tracklaying , scenics and operations on, or build a series of modules that you can take apart and join easily in different configurations, which will probably fit its new home better and easier. Building a series of boards that you can use as modules (all to matching and interchangeable dimensions) will let you practice and improve your building/carpentry skills anyway which can only be good. Since you already have the Miami layout and the one you bought, a third one seems a bit excessive. It is great to dream, but somewhere along the line practicality*** has to take over, or you are going to come down to earth with a hell of a bump!

Start off by thinking about what you MUST have, and then make a list and call it "Given" Make a second list of things that it would be nice to include" and call it "Druthers". Now draw a plan that includes what you have on the givens (but be prepared to live without some of them if they don't fit into the space you can use) and then see what you can add from druthers

*** "Practicality" includes the cost of the track and switchwork, the method of powering/operating it, the number and cost of the locos and rolling stock needed to operate it, and the amount of time you will have to spend removing dust and cleaning track in a bedroom environment.

I'm not trying to rain on your parade - just trying to save you from making expensive mistakes, which could mean you giving up the hobby through disappointment

[radivil]

Justin - if you are going to be moving out to go to college in a few years, I think you need to look at the planning from a different perspective. 1.The layout needs to be easily transportable 2. It needs to be either modular or foldable 3. It is unlikely that anything you build now will fit in your college dorm room 4.Between now and when you finish college your plans, skills and interests are going to change ENORMOUSLY!

I'd almost recommend it not really being easily transportable, but storable. Is that a word? Anyhow. College is such a time and resource consumer to the extent that its unlikely you'd be able to continue uninterrupted. If you have time, you will not have the available resources and if you have the available resources you will not have the time. Space will be an absolute luxury. Even if you get a house as an upperclassman, you'll still not have the space because you can't just selfishly devour the common areas your roommates are in on the lease to share. Let a layout go dormant. I realize its pretty crummy advice, but its realistic. When I was in school, the most space I'd have had for a layout was the 30"x72" space I had in the kitchen (my one bedroom apartment had an insanely huge kitchen for some reason). But I couldnt use it because that's where the table was.

[Justinmiller171]

My suggestion is that you either build a small transportable layout, and use it to practice tracklaying , scenics and operations on, or build a series of modules that you can take apart and join easily in different configurations, which will probably fit its new home better and easier. Building a series of boards that you can use as modules (all to matching and interchangeable dimensions) will let you practice and improve your building/carpentry skills anyway which can only be good. Since you already have the Miami layout and the one you bought, a third one seems a bit excessive. It is great to dream, but somewhere along the line practicality*** has to take over, or you are going to come down to earth with a hell of a bump!

This isn't going to be a third layout, this layout is going to be made with parts from the layout that I bought. and the collage I am going to go to is about 20 minutes from where I live today, so if I do move out It won't be into a dorm, also I need to clarify my layout design more, I will be building the layout in removable 2x4 sections, and one 2x6 section. The only part that would be hard to move is the main 4x6 part.

The other option is to build a layout in On30 scale and use all 2x4 sections, My "dream" layout would be an o-scale standard gauge layout so it might be helpful to get some practice now.

Anyways, this project isn't going to start for a few months so I have plenty of time to plan it out.

[steinjr]

And Here is my latest design...


I will be using a 4x6 for the main section of the layout( A 4x8 would be much to cumbersome to work on), there are 5 2x4 sections and one 2x6 section with is based on a design by Bryon Henderson:http://www.layoutvision.com/gallery/id22.html

Many of the 2x4's are scenery only, these will be useful in making the layout seem bigger than it really is, and they should be really easy to build

In my opinion, for whatever it may be worth, a worse design than your previous design with the big turn-back loops.

Some more specific comments:

4x6 in corner: reach issues at top and upper left hand corner (especially if layout is high), 18" radius inner loop with little straight track for couple or uncoupling cars.

Small loop for continuous run - short train can just run around and around and around in the same direction all the time, with half the loop hidden in a tunnel and half visible.

When you want to come out again from inner loop, you either have to back up all the way to the yard or to staging, or "cheat" by uncoupling engine, run around loop and couple to other end of train.

Yard at left end - very little yard capacity (8 -9 cars at max), and few places for trains to work at the layout, yet still a turntable with tracks for three engines.

Trains heading counterclockwise into the yard will get their engine trapped. To pull cars of engines and free up engine, inbound train must either be very short (if you plan for an engine to come out of the roundtable area yard to pull the cars off the trapped engine) , or you need to have a switcher hidden in that small, pretty inaccessible spur in far upper left corner of 4x6.

If you do, don't ever forget to throw that turnout up there in the upper left hand corner of the 4x6 - a derailment up in that corner will be pretty inconvenient to fix.

Industries on far right of layout : short runaround - you can run around perhaps 4 cars.

Except when there are cars parked at the industry in the siding on the siding, of course. If the runaround cannot be used, you will have to back up all around the layout when you return. The "runaround used for industry" was also there on the Lance Mindheim plan I showed you. But there the distance to back up was far less, and there were room for more cars on the runaround.

To switch two aisle side industries at far right of layout, you need to bring out outbound cars one at a time through a shortish switchback lead, and then bring in new cars one at a time through the same short switchback lead.

I would recommend stepping away from the CAD program and instead coming up with a clear list of givens and druthers.

Stein

[Justinmiller171]

Givens and Druthers

Scale: Ho-scale or On30

Railroad: A Freelanced subsidiary of the Southern Pacific

Era:1950's
Region:Northern California

Space:10x14

Describe Space: 10x14 bedroom

Governing Rolling Stock: 40' Boxcars

Relative Emphasis:

|_______________________________________V______|
Track/Operation .................................................. ..Scenic realism
|________________V_____________________________|
Mainline Running .................................................. ........ Switching

Operation Priorities:

1. Local Freight Operations
2. Passenger Train Operation

Typical operating Crew: 1-2 people

[steinjr]

Governing Rolling Stock: 40' Boxcars

<snip>

2. Passenger Train Operation

If you want to run passenger trains, then 40-foot boxcars is not the governing rolling stock. The governing rolling stock (the biggest rolling stock you are going to run - the stuff that determine your minimal curve radius and turnout angles) would then probably be some kind of passenger cars. What kind of passenger trains do you want to run?

Also, you are saying that you prefer mainline running to switching, and scenic realism to operation, yet still list "local freight operation" as your no 1 operation priority.

What does that mean, in your own words? What is your vision for this layout - if you were to describe a typical run of one of your trains - how would you envision it?

Stein

[Justinmiller171]

[/quote]

If you want to run passenger trains, then 40-foot boxcars is not the governing rolling stock. The governing rolling stock (the biggest rolling stock you are going to run - the stuff that determine your minimal curve radius and turnout angles) would then probably be some kind of passenger cars. What kind of passenger trains do you want to run?

Also, you are saying that you prefer mainline running to switching, and scenic realism to operation, yet still list "local freight operation" as your no 1 operation priority.

What does that mean, in your own words? What is your vision for this layout - if you were to describe a typical run of one of your trains - how would you envision it?

Stein[/quote]

Opps! I wasn't thinking about passenger trains when I put in the governing rolling stock, The passenger trains I want to run will be short, about as big as a 50' box car.

What I meant when I said I prefer Mainline running to switching is that I prefer running the train through the scenery better than switching, and local freight operation involves both of these.

What I envision a regular day on the layout is this, using my last design as an example: Train 1 would depart from the yard with a train ordered to do switching at the bottom right module of the layout, it would pick up its consist from the yard then head down the hill and proceed to the town, once it reached the town it would perform its switching and then would head back to the yard, once it reached the beginning of the 3% grade up to the yard it would have to wait for the helper stationed at the top of the grade to pick it up and help it over the grade, them it would reach the yard and that would be the end of its job.

On second thought that doesn't sound very interesting at all

I should probably read through Lance Mindheim's book again, and make up another wants and needs list before I make any more designs.

[ocalicreek]

My "dream" layout would be an o-scale standard gauge layout so it might be helpful to get some practice now.

If that's your dream, then why aren't you buying up O scale equipment and stashing it away? I know, you have the HO stuff now so do something with what you have is good advice I'd offer anyone. But why not get rid of the HO and go On30? Many folks seem quite happy to do just that.

IF that's your dream then On30 makes the most sense. Sell the HO stuff you've got now and invest in a nice Atlas O starter set or On30 equipment. On30 will fit your space, sure, if you have room for HO then most On30 stuff will take up relatively the same space - however - structures and scenery will take up FOUR TIMES the space as their HO counterparts, structure for structure and tree for tree.

O scale standard gauge is EXPENSIVE stuff that takes up alot of room if you want it to be comparable to what you can do in the same space in HO. That's why On30 has been so popular. But On30 is not modern Miami industrial switching. Maybe 1920's Everglades sugar cane industry with a dual gauge interchange freight house in Miami, but that's a major change to contemplate.

Bruce Chubb built the original Sunset Valley in sections in his father-in-law's garage for six or seven years before he and his wife found a suitable basement with a home attached. They collected what they liked from train shows and hobby shops and built models on the kitchen table. But even in those early days he had a vision for what he wanted his layout to be. Then when he had the space it was a matter of connecting the components. That layout lasted a few decades, was the inspiration for countless articles and technological developments, and was satisfying until the last op session. Now he's taken the concept into a new home and is at it again. The best stories are timeless just like the best layout ideas carry on from place to place through all stages of our lives.

The layouts I built before I went off to college did not carry over through my post-grad work or into my career and family life. But the concepts I developed after college have carried through and every layout I have worked on since then has been a variation on a theme. Not every modeler thinks this way, but many do and it's worth paying attention to.

Galen

[Justinmiller171]

Alright, so I guess On30 is the way to go then,

The reason I am not selling my Ho-scale stuff is that my "dream Layout" is in O-scale 2-rail, and that is very expensive stuff, Atlas trainman engines can run up to $200 and I don't have much of an Ho-scale collection to sell, Most of my stuff is either Bachmann or life-like stuff made in the 80's and won't sell for much, and I won't be building my dream layout for about another 15-20 years, but I will keep an eye out for stuff at trainshows.

One question I have for you Galen, is that why do you keep referring to my Ho-scale Miami Layout, that is just a " get something done" layout that will still get worked on but it was mostly just so I could say I had built something and is mainly a practice layout. The only reason I chose Miami is because that is what Lance Mindheim and CNW1961 did and so I could get an idea of what my layout would be like before I built it.

If I do go On30 I will most likely build a Northern California Logging layout, Built in 2x4 foot modules.