New small ISL trackplan - need feedback

[Yngve]

Hello folks,

I'm currently planning a small ISL to play around with and I would like your feedback on the layout I have drawn. As I'm a beginner when it comes to layout construction I have decided its best to test my skills on something small.

A little bit of info:
- Scenic area is approximately 5 feet long by 1 1/2 feet wide (see grid on drawing).
- Overpass to "hide" track to staging.
- Modern rolling stock. I model European railroad, but the principles of switcing layouts are basically the same.
- Requirement that it must be easily portable and can be setup in short time for a quick evening operating session.

What I would like to know if there is anything you would modify to improve operations, because thats the area where I'm really a newbie. I have been fascinated with switching layouts for quite some time, but I have very little experience myself with operations and it would be a shame to build a layout only to find that operations are too limited.

Larger image: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://oi43.tinypic.com/2evzx2f.jpg">http://oi43.tinypic.com/2evzx2f.jpg</a><!-- m -->



Thank you!

Best regards,
Yngve

[lajry]

Doesn't look like you have any room for a run around track so you'll always have to put your loco behind the cars & shove them out of staging.
Two Questions:
1. What do you mean by a "loading area"?
2. Is the purpose of the 2nd track down for "fiddling" cars around? Squeeze one more track in there & you could make a runaround track.

[FCIN]

Yngve;

I don't see anything that needs to be radically changed, although I think the dept of 30" on the scenic area may be a bit much - 24" would probably work just fine, but that's your call. You've got plenty of locations to spot cars without trying to fill every inch with track and switches and which is what you want on a switching layout. You certainly don't need a runaround track on an industrial spur of this length just to try and add some kind of complexity to operations. You'll find industrial spurs all over the country where the train is shoved into the spur.

About the only change I'd make would be to make the warehouse occupy the full length of that spur, to allow a couple more car spots. But otherwise, I'd make the open area beyond it, into some other industry rather than what appears to be another team track area.

I like the double staging track, which would allow you to have two trains staged that could work the spur at different times, i.e.; a first shift and third shift job, each of which might only work specific industries.

[Yngve]

Thank you for your feedback! The idea of the loading area behind the warehouse is that its an enclosed area which belongs to the warehouse for goods which cannot be unloaded through the sidedoors in the building. So the warehouse will have two car spots + spot in the open area behind. But I'm still in the planning stage so things might (and probably will) change a bit.

I decided very early to not have a runaround track as I don't want a layout that is full of track only, I felt that it was too cramped and personally I don't like the look of very short runaround tracks.

In regards to the double staging track that was my idea to have two trains on the layout, simply so that I can have longer operating sessions without having to use my hands to change the rolling stock.

[FCIN]

In regards to the double staging track that was my idea to have two trains on the layout, simply so that I can have longer operating sessions without having to use my hands to change the rolling stock.

I've being playing around with that same idea on my layout, where I could have two separate trains staged for longer operating sessions. Perhaps one crew switches only one of the larger industries and the other takes care of the remaining ones.

As for no runaround, that is certainly no problem. I'm aware of some fairly short industrial spurs that do include a runaround (Richwood, KY on the NS comes immediately to mind), they seem to be few and far between. Although I've played around with a few track plans for my own switching layout that could include a runaround, it just never looks or feels right for an industrial spur that is just slightly over 1/4 scale mile in length. Having the engine shove the train into the spur and work the industries has never been an issue with me and having worked similar long spurs in that manner out in the real world, it's something that feels quite natural to me.

[BR60103]

I would leave the extra track. It can be used to place cars that you don't want to move to someone else's siding. Later it could be the connection to the next module.

Until you mentioned 2 trains, I was going to suggest a loose piece of track, one loco long, at the end of the staging yard, to move the loco from one track to the next.
(a "cassette", maybe)

[lajry]

Have attached an image of one kind of "staging tray". An internet search will turn up other types. The purpose of the tray is to be able to roll cars on & off the trays onto a layout without actually handling the cars. The trays can be stored in drawers or shelves when not needed. The switch could be put on the layout side leaving you 3 1/2 feet of tray in the staging area if your grid spacing is 1 ft. increments.

   

[alcanman]

Hi Yngve, I like your track plan very much, it's my kind of layout.

The 'Inglenook' arrangement works well and is fun to operate.

If fact ,the track plan is similar to my current 'CSX Transflo, NY' and also my old layout 'CSX Palmetto Spur'.

I tend to agree with Ed that the 30 inch width could be reduced, my layouts are only 15 inches wide.

You mentioned operating European rolling stock, which country in Europe do you model?

Good luck with the project and I look forward to seeing your progress.


Mal

[Tyson Rayles]

I didn't see what his scale is but if it's HO then I agree 30" is much bigger than is needed. However if you can afford the space there is nothing wrong with making it that wide, more room for scenery and 3-D buildings.

[Yngve]

Hello and thank you for the nice comments! I will definately consider reducing the width of the layout. Considering that I want it to be easy to handle its only an advantage to make it smaller, so I will look into that.

Hi Yngve, I like your track plan very much, it's my kind of layout.

The 'Inglenook' arrangement works well and is fun to operate.

If fact ,the track plan is similar to my current 'CSX Transflo, NY' and also my old layout 'CSX Palmetto Spur'.

I tend to agree with Ed that the 30 inch width could be reduced, my layouts are only 15 inches wide.

You mentioned operating European rolling stock, which country in Europe do you model?

Good luck with the project and I look forward to seeing your progress.


Mal

I have followed your threads closely, your layouts have been some of the most inspiring for me and definately pushed me towards the decision of making a small ISL. Its also good to hear feedback from people who have operated similar layouts.

I live in Norway so I have quite a bit of Norwegian rolling stock. But when it comes to modern freight cars they are travelling all over Europe so they are not dedicated to one specific country. I saw a thread on a Norwegian forum called "Foreign freight cars on Norwegian tracks" and there are various freight cars from all over Europe. After travelling to Denmark for the last two summers and witnessing the international freight trains rolling through the country my collection of freight cars have increased quite alot with freight cars from Transwaggon, Railion, DB Cargo, Wascosa, Nacco, etc.... It gives me another source of variety on my layout as I can run international style freight trains of today, or typical Norwegian rolling stock which were more common in the 80's and 90's.

For switching I will mainly use this beauty <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.nexusboard.net/showthread.php?siteid=2408&threadid=323190">http://www.nexusboard.net/showthread.ph ... did=323190</a><!-- m -->
Its from a private German company, which will work well for a small switching layout. It was an expensive purchase for such a small loco, but it looks fantastic and runs beautifully!

(PS! Check out my youtube channel, I have just finished a video series from my latest Denmark trip and it includes a lot of the typical international freight trains you see in Europe <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/user/MrYoung86/videos">http://www.youtube.com/user/MrYoung86/videos</a><!-- m --> )

[shortliner]

Yngve - good trackplan ! For the cassette see Carls Scrapbook #80 <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.carendt.com/scrapbook/page80/index.html#4">http://www.carendt.com/scrapbook/page80/index.html#4</a><!-- m -->
and #83a <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.carendt.com/scrapbook/page83a/">http://www.carendt.com/scrapbook/page83a/</a><!-- m --> about halfway down the page

My current layout has a 3-track traverser for staging = I can't post it until a week Saturday as it is packed ready to go to Inverness Show that weekend. There are photos of it here <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/72979-sin-city-33rd-street-switching/">http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... switching/</a><!-- m -->
and If you want to see the original O gauge version they are here <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH08bt49DvU">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH08bt49DvU</a><!-- m --> and here <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/bvdoorn/sets/72157630022557816/with/6903039397/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/bvdoorn/se ... 903039397/</a><!-- m -->

Hope it helps
Jack

[Southern Tuxedo]

Where's the "Like" button?

Btw, did I miss an earlier plan? The one in the original post shows a 18 x 60 sceniced layout.

Mark

[shortliner]

Where's the "Like" button?

Btw, did I miss an earlier plan? The one in the original post shows a 18 x 60 sceniced layout.

Mark

I don't think so, Mark - The original O gauge plan by Bart van Doorn is a bit deceiving - his plan is 320cm long x 38 cm wide(approx 10' 6" x 15") No traverser or extension track is shown, but if you look at the video on Youtube - right at the start you can see a 3 track traverser beyond the end of the board - I believe that it is 100 cm (39") long, holding 3 cars in O gauge - Mine holds 3 x 50'cars and a Geep loco. The squares on his plan don't seem to tie in to any set length as far as I can see, so I did a "make it up as you go along" adaptation - I have just fitted an MRC synchro sound box so it now makes noises like its bigger brother!
Hope that makes it all a bit less "mud-like"!

[Southern Tuxedo]

Where's the "Like" button?

Btw, did I miss an earlier plan? The one in the original post shows a 18 x 60 sceniced layout.

Mark

I don't think so, Mark - The original O gauge plan by Bart van Doorn is a bit deceiving - his plan is 320cm long x 38 cm wide(approx 10' 6" x 15") No traverser or extension track is shown, but if you look at the video on Youtube - right at the start you can see a 3 track traverser beyond the end of the board - I believe that it is 100 cm (39") long, holding 3 cars in O gauge - Mine holds 3 x 50'cars and a Geep loco. The squares on his plan don't seem to tie in to any set length as far as I can see, so I did a "make it up as you go along" adaptation - I have just fitted an MRC synchro sound box so it now makes noises like its bigger brother!
Hope that makes it all a bit less "mud-like"!

Jack,
Thanks for the reply, but I was referring to several previous comments about the plan being 30" deep. (My original post should have said 18" x 60".)

Mark

[Yngve]

Since there seems to be some confusion about the size I can inform you about the following:
- The size of the "sceniced part" is 150x50 cm. When converting to inches its 59" x 19,7"
- The grid size is 1'. Normally I would use centimeters, but I put it as feet since I was asking for advice here.

I actually did not react to the 30" being mentioned earlier because I'm used to using centimeters, not inches.

So yeah, hope that clears up any confusion.