Fiddling with layout ideas

[sailormatlac]

I'm actually in the planning process of a new layout at home. After thinking about it, I've come to the conclusion I have enough space for a 16" x 10 feet long shelve layout with a L-shaped staging area and a possibility for an extension.

Planning with software is nice, but I thought making mock ups would speed up the process by dealing with the real thing.

Here's the preliminary results:

1) Hereford Railway - CPR/MEC - Protofreelanced - 1950s - Steam and diesel power

This one is as straight forward as you can. It depicts a typical rural community with the proverbial feedmill and wood products.





2) Hereford Railway (2)

This one takes advantage of the possibility of the extension to add a wye. No need to manually turn engine off layout.





3) Temiscouata Railway - 1948 - Steam power

This one is based on the real town of Connors, NB. Track plan follows the prototype. It was also a small farming community exporting lumber, pulpwood, shingles, poles and ties. Very simplistic, but does the job. I kind of like the vast fields in front of the station. Makes for a believable layout. The engine terminal is also nice in itself, bringing the possibility to operation both daily mixed trains.







Matt

[MasonJar]

Wow! Those are great mock-ups! How big are they and what did you use to make them?

I'm a big fan of steam, and simple rural single track. I think I like the one with the wye best, but the one with the turntable is pretty sweet too.

Andrew

[sailormatlac]

Wow! Those are great mock-ups! How big are they and what did you use to make them?

I'm a big fan of steam, and simple rural single track. I think I like the one with the wye best, but the one with the turntable is pretty sweet too.

Andrew

Thanks Andrew! It seems we've got the same dilemna! I remember seeing a very nice article in MRH about a guy modeling great steam era rural community. It was truly inspiring. I can't remember the issue though.

They are at 1" = 1' scale which make them large enough to play with them and easy to scale down. I used 1/8 inch thick carboard, cheap acrylic paints, ground foam for trees and styrofoam for landforms and buildings. Tracks are Tamiya masking tape cut in 3mm stripes which is roughly the roadbed width. Tracks are drawn with a black Sharpie pen.

It took about 90 minutes to build each mock-ups. The wye took about 30 minutes. Really fun to build and at least, it's still modelling.

Matt

[ratled]

I like the one with the wye if you are looking for "votes"
ratled

[Canadian Atlantic Railway]

I like the second option as well. I think the wye would make operations more interesting.

[MasonJar]

I might have to give it a try. I'm trying to work out a final design for my 15x8 L-shaped space. I can go up to 24" deep. There a ton of stuff I want to do, but will have to be realistic about what I can squeeze in.

Ian Wilson's steam books have several towns/villages/stations that are at the end of line. I can't recall which one, but it has a wye, where the main continues through to the second leg. The station and related industry was on the third leg. Incoming trains would go past on the wye, and then reverse to the station.

Of course in the age of steam, the end of the line would always have to have some way of turning the engine.


Andrew

[MountainMan]

I like Ian's stuff. Some of his small layouts just cry out to be modeled.

[teejay]

I guess I like the turn table version because it takes up a lot less space in a small layout , but accomplishes the same .

[sailormatlac]

Thanks for the feedbacks.

One thing is sure, I think I have to accept the fact this layout should focus on modeling a branchline terminus.

A few thoughts about each layout plan after reading your answers. Feel free to reply.

Option 1: Not practical for steam, but quite efficient for diesel in term of space use. Similar to option 3 in terms of operation if one doesn't mind to turn the locomotive outside the layout. That wouldn't be unprototypical. I've seen many turntables and wyes located a few hundred feet away from the terminus on branchlines in the middle of nowhere.

Option 2: Sounds great at first, but basically, it means the wye legs can't be used for spotting cars. It would only work if the tail track was used for this but it should be longer and I can't afford that. It means only the team track should be used to spot cars which isn't a bad idea.

If used with diesel, the track plan works nicely. The extension makes the layout visual appear less like a shelf and more like a real global area, though it means the benchwork is more complex to build... Behing the extension is a staircase going down stair.

Option 3: As Teejay said, it's the most efficient track plan. Don't wonder why, I just copied the prototype. This is probably the best way to go for a terminus on a branchline. Also, the ratio of scenery vs track is quite high, which makes sense. If the topography is well rendered with a raised roadbed emerging from cultivated fields and wild grass, that could be a stunning project. Also a big point for this project is the fact you can stage a departing train and a arriving train with all the action required to fuel the locomotive.

Head scratching just starting!

Matt

[Tyson Rayles]

I'm guessing you are building in HO? You could do so much more in that small space in N scale. That said I would stick with diesel as the turntable or wye is a huge waste of space in such a small area. Even if you run steam I still wouldn't have the TT or wye as on small rural branch lines they usually just ran em' forward then backed them back down the branch. The low traffic flow didn't justify the extra expense when the train was so short the loco could pull it easily enough going backward.

[teejay]

HAHAHAHA .... i just knew Mike would chime in with his shameless AB-n-ormal scale pitch

[sailormatlac]

I'm guessing you are building in HO? You could do so much more in that small space in N scale. That said I would stick with diesel as the turntable or wye is a huge waste of space in such a small area. Even if you run steam I still wouldn't have the TT or wye as on small rural branch lines they usually just ran em' forward then backed them back down the branch. The low traffic flow didn't justify the extra expense when the train was so short the loco could pull it easily enough going backward.

I must admit my train of thoughts isn't far from yours.

The prototype, Hereford Railway was cut from its connection with Maine Central. CPR took over for about 20 years and as far as my researches can go, they never took care of turning the locomotives at the new "terminal" that was just an old ordinary ex-mainline station. The original roundhouse was on the US side at Beecher Falls. CPR cut the line about 2 stations before the boundary.

The line wasn't very profitable and CPR was very reluctant to operate it. Under these circumstances, they wouldn't have put money into building a new turntable or a new wye in 1927. Your scenario makes a lot of sense. That means they would have run reverse for about 20 miles! Realistic for a 5 cars mixed train? I've seen many pictures of logging railroad doing such things. In this case, most locomotives CPR operated for regional service were either their proverbial 4-6-0 or 4-4-0 from the 1880s.

EDIT: But hey, I've been searching like crazy a pictures of a mixed freight running reverse and never saw one... weird.

Matt

[sailormatlac]

HAHAHAHA .... i just knew Mike would chime in with his shameless AB-n-ormal scale pitch

Predictable! Normal scale always rules! You know it, were are just heretics unaware of their wrongs!

Joke aside, if I was doing something in N scale with the same space, I would keep exactly the same kind of track plan but wouldn't have to use annoying selective compression and scenery would be all over the place.

Matt

[Tyson Rayles]

I have seen pictures of mixed trains running backwards but never with more than 12-15 cars. However if it doesn't say, with a still picture it's hard to determine which direction the train is going . As Terry knows my home layout is N. I don't have a lot of room at home and I didn't want a layout in which the train doesn't seem to be going anywhere so I tried (with some doubts) N scale. Glad I did, I would never consider anything else now. I work mainly in O at work but we do have some HO, S and G. Working on the locos themselves is easier in the larger scales but everything else is the same or easier in N. Scenery is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy easier in N. But your mileage may vary as they say.

[Sumpter250]

I like the Wye ( #2).
I would think a two track staging area ?
with the Wye, there would be switching possibilities there, as well as in the industrial area.
just a thought.