ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.
so i've been overwhelmed checking out layout plans and reading about construction. i figured i'd start small, with a little 1' x 3' switching layout. i'm flirting with the idea of making it possible to expand the layout on either end so that the two tracks that run straight across can be made continuous, but then there'd be a reverse loop, and that's over my head. also, if that reverse loop-ish track in the very center were insulated (which i don't really understand that well, i could run one switcher on both the top and bottom half of the layout (i don't plan to use dcc).
my general setting is probably going to be a bnsf and union pacific shared yard in central california.
any and all input is welcome, as i still don't really have any idea what i'm doing... this isn't a definitive plan. just kind of a vague blueprint at the moment.
I like the idea a lot although I'd recommend stretching it out to 4' in length, that way you can squeeze in more cars or more scenery. I did a 1x4' in HO as a micro layout, and I can advise the use of a small section of staging, say a 3' long x 4" wide plank with two or three tracks on it, this will greatly enhance your operating ability.
One nice thing about micro layouts is that they are relative quick and easy to build and dont cost you an arm and a leg, I honestly believe its the best way to get started and get your feet wet without being completely overwhelmed by the enormity of the task that you'd feel on a larger layout. As an example, I completed all the ballast on my HO micro layout in two evenings!
A couple of "rules-of-thumb" to follow when designing switching layouts...
*The length of your passing or "run-around" tracks will determine the length of the trains you can operate.
*Leads have to be long enough to accomodate at least one loco & one car.
You mentioned BNSF & UP, so I'm assuming you're talking modern-type equipment, which can be quite long...
I notice that you have two passing tracks...I would think that on a plan this size, you could eliminate one of those...this would save you some space, & I don't think it would adversly affect operations...
thanks for the input, guys. i'm going to go back to work on this and see what i can come up with. i'd really like to keep this plan 1' x 3' (apartment living), but i'm sure i can add at least another 6" to it. as long as it can fit on the tabletop, it should work.
i'm also going to try to figure out way to make it a bit more accessible for longer rolling stock. and the staging idea is a great one, although i'm still not really sure as to how best to build detachable pieces in terms of reliably connecting the track.
and... can a mod please move this to the layout design and construction forum? sorry again for the mixup.
after taking your advice into consideration, i've made a few changes while still desperately trying to stay no longer than 3' for the sake of space.
i've made sure there's at least the 7 1/2" or so on each lead to hold a switcher and a 40' car, which is probably all i'll use and i'll reconcile that with eras and everything somehow. there's also only really room for two cars in the runaround, but at least there's a runaround and maybe i can extend it a bit more to the right. i'm also close to having enough room for an inglenook up top, but i don't even think it's possible to fit 5 cars, then the locomotive and three more cars on 36" of track...
biggest problem i see now is that there's no real room for scenery in between any of the tracks, and i don't know how to add that space without having to add overall length.
Combining that cossover with a siding is not a good idea. The curve coming off the crossover will be way too sharp and you've created a nasty "S" curve in the process. Why not moove tha crossover to the left and then have a longer siding to the right? Looks like it would work and operations would be easier and more reliable. You could even have the lead to the industral track extended, like a yard lead, connect to the bottom track, and use that for a crossover. Try thinking of it as a small yard coming off the top mainline, with a switching district going off the right. You could work in some street running and urban warehouses for scenery.
Combining that cossover with a siding is not a good idea. The curve coming off the crossover will be way too sharp and you've created a nasty "S" curve in the process. Why not moove tha crossover to the left and then have a longer siding to the right? Looks like it would work and operations would be easier and more reliable. You could even have the lead to the industral track extended, like a yard lead, connect to the bottom track, and use that for a crossover. Try thinking of it as a small yard coming off the top mainline, with a switching district going off the right. You could work in some street running and urban warehouses for scenery.
forgive my inexperience with the appropriate terminology, but i'm not sure i understand which point you're talking about. both of the crossovers end up having turnouts in them; one for a siding and one for the runaround. do i need to get rid of those and put a bit of straight track in instead, for the sake of not having back-to-back curves? sorry if i'm misinterpreting.
also, i'm toying with the idea of expanding this layout to 4' by using two 1' x 2' sections that can be laid on a tabletop and connected. i don't know enough about the methods of fastening sections (other than c-clamps, which won't work for just laying the layout on an existing table) to know whether or not that idea is worth pursuing. two 1' x 2' sections would actually be easier to store than one 1' x 3', i'd imagine. i guess the headache of connecting them can replace the headache of trying to fit this all into 3'.
I just took a quick look here. Your second design is MUCH better than the first with a few provisos.
If you rotate the long axis so the tracks go across the module diagonally, you can gain a little length on some tracks. That will affect the design of any additions though.
Since you have very limited space, you might want to consider that sometimes "less is more" - cut out a couple of switches / turnouts and lengthen other tracks.
Expanding a foot or two lengthwise could make things much more operable.
Do a Google on "shelf layouts" or "N shelf switching" or "microlayouts" - you'll get a lot of hits with other trackplans that might give you some ideas.
Let me dig into my archive of trackplans and see if there's anything there worth posting.
I did a quick drawing of what I'm trying to illustrate. Get rid of the existing crossover and extend the yard lead, so it can do double duty as a crossover. Use the other switch as a lead to an industrial track and a siding that connects at the right end of the layout. That eliminates an "S" curve and gives you a few more industry opportunities.
ok, so i've decided to go from 1' x 3' to 1' x 4', using two different two-foot sections. i have no idea how i'm going to connect them, but i'm just working on the design right now.
my new goal is to have track sections end right at the midway point, for obvious reasons. that's limiting me quite a bit, but i've come up with a couple of loose ideas that i thought you guys could help me with. i'm still trying to keep an inglenook at the top, and i'm still trying to keep a decent amount of operations and opportunity for scenery without using too much track or making it too bland.
and here's something similar, but a bit more stripped down.
Wow! That's a neat design. I really like what you've done here! I made section joints by simply bolting two sections (plywood frames with plywood tops) together with carriage bolts and then ensuring that the roadbed at the section joint is perfectly level. After that, jooining the track is easy with rail joiners.
continuing to work on layout designs. i'll probably start solidifying plans after the dulles train expo this weekend. i still haven't even really decided on a size yet. i'm not comfortable enough with everything yet to be convinced i can construct two satisfactory 1' x 2' sections, and the more i think about this layout the more i want to keep it really basic and concise. i think i'm actually probably more of a continuous operation guy, so i don't want to build a giant switcher layout that i may not use. i'd rather learn the basics with something small and then perhaps start work on a larger layout.
with that in mind, i'm toying with some variation of this idea, which is 36" x roughly 9". the red highlighted track represents the inglenook. i'd still like there to be a puzzle in the layout, even if it's only a simple one:
If you like continuous operation then consider doing a 2' x 4' with an oval of track. I once saw a plan for an oval that had an inglenook on one side and John Allen's timesaver on the other with a backdrop going down the middle.
Personally I'd stay away from the switching puzzles, they're designed for very challenging operation, unless that's your thing. A very simple cut down puzzle can provide far greater realistic operation.
If I was to start over and start in N scale I'd do a 4' x 4' on a 12" wide shelf similar to Lance Mindheim's East Rail project, very simplistic but absolutely stunning in terms of visual effect and still highly operable. This can be done as a shelf in the corner of a spare room and will hardly take up any space at all, even for space starved modellers this is quite feasible.
Linn Westcott's Switchman's Nightmare would fit in 1X4 feet in N scale and might offer a more realistic challenge than some of the puzzles that have been proposed in this thread.
Linn Westcott's Switchman's Nightmare would fit in 1X4 feet in N scale and might offer a more realistic challenge than some of the puzzles that have been proposed in this thread.
Your last design is by far the best yet. It gives you some switching opportunity but is not too clustered to only fit into an urban area. It will easily fit into your future layout
If you like continuous operation then consider doing a 2' x 4' with an oval of track. I once saw a plan for an oval that had an inglenook on one side and John Allen's timesaver on the other with a backdrop going down the middle.
Personally I'd stay away from the switching puzzles, they're designed for very challenging operation, unless that's your thing. A very simple cut down puzzle can provide far greater realistic operation.
If I was to start over and start in N scale I'd do a 4' x 4' on a 12" wide shelf similar to Lance Mindheim's East Rail project, very simplistic but absolutely stunning in terms of visual effect and still highly operable. This can be done as a shelf in the corner of a spare room and will hardly take up any space at all, even for space starved modellers this is quite feasible.
out of curiosity, what's the bare minimum serviceable radius for 40' switchers and 50' road switchers? i'm toying with the idea of having my cake and eating it too with something like a 15" x 36" oval with 7.5" minimum radii, but i think that may be pushing it...
still working on refining the 1' x 3' and 1' x 4' ideas, too. all of the board's input has been very helpful.
I wouldn't go under 9" in N scale and even that is a little tight. On 24" your diameter is going to be about 20" if you leave 2" on either side which gives you a radius of 10".
