Looking for 10x16 ft. HO layout feedback


SlavaK815

SlavaK815

Member
Looking for 10x16 ft. HO layout feedback from more experienced folks.

I’ve been planning HO layout for my bonus room for quite some time and would like to hear what you think about my layout. I am relatively new to the model railroading and would appreciate some good advice so I don’t have to redo something major later.

I have the following requirements/constrains/wishlist -

1. The room size is ~16x10 ft.
2. I’d like to model in HO
3. I’d like to have two loops so I could run trains with my kid without collisions.
4. Max grade is 2 - 2.5%
5. Min curve radius 22.5” with easements on the main track
6. 2.5” between main tracks
7. Staging area
8. Yard, some branches, bypass track(s)
9. Have a spot to reverse a locomotive

What do you think? Is anything looks obviously wrong? What would you change? I do think it has too much track, but what can I do :)?

I am attaching two pictures –

• main with upper level shows the yard
• main with lower level shows two separate staging areas

Thank you,
Slava
 
I would just do a double mainline since thats what you want. I would also take out those 2 open pits and only make one. In my opinion a double mainline around the whole layout room, one big loop and make peninsula area in the middle as big as you can make one without interfering with walkways.

On the peninsula you could have a yard with a wye coming off of it to turn directions of locos, or you can have a nice big industry area on the peninsula... a person can do alot with a peninsula

I think with one pit instead of two you will have more room for other "wants"
With the room you have there is no reason you cant have 26-27 radius curves and up, more like 28-30 radius. This will not only look much better but run easier with less problems.

You have a good chunk of layout room to work with, i would use this to your advantage. Broad curves are cool!!

How much separation do you have between levels, just curious?
So you basically have a "nolix". In guessing that's why you need that center section for the mainline run up to the second level??

These are just my opinions, i do think you did a good job with you layout design, everyone had there own tastes on what they like
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where will you put your structures and scenery?

Thats an awful lot of track. I would simplify it a bit. It looks too crowded.
 
Hi Slava, I'm a big fan of around the room shelf railroads. The shelf either fastened to the walls or freestanding as long narrow tables with legs made to your height desire.

You could double track (two mains) to keep trains separated, but it depends on the type of running you all want. Kids tend to get bored quickly and just running a train round and round doesn't keep them interested. They usually like hands on work, switching and so on. If you truly have the whole room I would suggest a shelf railroad with bridges to span doorways, lift out bridge if the door opens in.

A double track main will keep the two of you separated, but for more interesting and realistic operation you may want to consider a single track main with passing sidings.

Setup rules for meets and off you go.

The shelf type will give you larger radius curves and a long run to change elevation. A double decker may even be possible. Corners would be great spaces for sidings and/or you can use peninsulas into the room for sidings too. Set the height of the railroad for you and built a 16" x 48" padded bench/stool for your son to stand on. As he gets older the bench legs can be shortened and eventually done away with.
 
Thanks all for your suggestions.
This is the shelf layout to be built in a loaf room, the left side on the picture is open and leads to other rooms/stairs down, the upper/down sides are walls, the right side has a window. I have a room picture I posted on another thread - http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showpost.php?p=298869&postcount=12
There is no walk-around layout, the two pits inside are to operate the railroad and I’d have to duck under. I was thinking about the single pit but that would significantly shorten the length of the main track, plus with the current design when train goes complete loop it goes through a left or right side twice in different directions, I thought it was kind of cool.
The upper level is elevated 4.5”, subtract 0.5” for plywood and 0.5” for track/roadbed and that would leave 3.5” for trains. I consider increasing this to 5” but that would increase the grade form 2.4% to 2.7% that would then shorten the max length of a train that can climb. I am not sure by how much but that is a concern.
Single track with passing track is certainly an option; I could then remove orange loop. The fewer tracks will make the model more realistic but would it be less interesting to operate?
 
I'm in Joe's camp with the double-track main and the peninsula. You didn't mention if you were using DC or going the DCC route. The double track would allow continuous DC running and avoid considerable expense, but still allow you to block-run the peninsula for switching duties. Allowing for the duck-under, I don't see how you would be able to connect the lower level (I'm going by the picture you posted - that lower level is low if I'm interpreting the photo correctly). You have a solid start with the benchwork!
 
I was thinking DCC with power routing in the staging area.

>I don't see how you would be able to connect the lower level
Two levels only present in the center piece of the layout, the rest is single level with grades. One picture shows layout with the second level in the center, the other shows second level removed to reveal first level. the first level contains staging area.
 
I think both are interesting trackplans. The problem in my mind is all the 'ducking under' you will have to do, to operate the layout, as you've shown in either case. Using 22" ro even 24" min radius gives you lots of options in a room of this size.

Not sure having a peninsula, with a 180 degree curve on it is much of an option, as the aisles on either side of it, would be about 24-30" each, assuming you also had a 2' section of layout, or either side of the aisle.
 
I agree with others that you will hate the duckunders. I would seriously consider a double deck layout around the walls for that tight of a space. Model railroader has done many bedroom size layout contests over the years which can be expanded to
your space.

Steve
 
I agree the duckunder is certainly a disadvantage, I am trying to understand myself if this is just an inconvenience or a killer and how much of this inconvenience could be compensated by raising layout level. The current duckunder height is 40”, but I could easily replace the legs to raise it up. I took the basic shape idea from MRR 2007 March magazine - Olympic & Puget Sound Ry.

On the other side if I avoid duckunder completely I’d have to build something like attached where ~35% of the layout would be taken by the turnarounds. This would be somewhat similar to MRR December 2005 Ma & Pa Pennsylvania Division.

I am building the benchwork with mobility in mind in case we move. The benchwork is free standing. The double decked layout would be too complex for me to build and don’t have space/skils to build a helix, this is my first layout.

Are there any people with duckunder layouts? Is this a pain or a killer? Do you wish now you’d built anything else but a duckunder?

Thanks all,
Slava
 
how high is your benchwork going to be, how high is your height of track?
Many people choose to have benchwork in the 38-48 range, i have mine at 50 inches, basically with a duckunder the higher the better...
 
My current setup is 36" between the floor and the bottom of the benchwork; track low level is at 40", high level at 44.5". The legs have 3.5" T-Nut bolts so I could get up to 3" more. If that is not enought I could replace the legs later - thay are cheap and made of 2x4 studs.
 
Have you thought about using a drop down bridge?

I have a duckunder, and I've had it for 3 years now, and i hate it. So I'm going to build a drop down bridge that will use hinges. The width of the bridge will be around 23" wide. I'm a small guy though and its plenty of room.
 
Duckunders are a pain in the back (and legs) as you get older. 36" is pretty low. Do a mock-up with a pair of sawhorses set on blocks and a piece of plywood the width of your benchwork and try it out...3 or 4 times. The inside of the turnarounds can be used for industries, industrial parks or just showcases for structures. Just my two cents.
willie
 
Slava,

I liked the Puget Sound RR too! If height is not an issue, I might look to go with one of your original plans, if I made it 48" off the floor, or higher. Might mean little kids couldn't see things easily, but if that's not an issue, then 48" is a lot different than 36". Still not as comfortable as say 60", however. Keeping things closer to eye level gives things a more realistic perspective.
 
I built the benchwork in a way what legs can be detached and replaced with another legs of different size. I realize 36” is low but my son is less than 5 years old and it is already quite high for him. Sometime later I may replace the legs.

Another thing I found interesting for myself is that I built my layout in AnyRail and then could export it to TrainPlayer program that allows to operate trains over your layout on a PC. This is good test to figure out is operating your layout is challenging/interesting or gets boring too soon.

Slava
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FWIW, you could always build a 'platform,' of say 6" so that your son could better see what is doing on up in the clouds at 48". Could become part of a mushroom, later on....
Otis
 
I've finally finished my modular benchwork this weekend! It only took me one year :).

I've decided to keep duckunder plan and I've changed the legs to raise layout height, now I have 48" to duckunder, hope that should be ok.
 
That benchwork looks great, well done.

But I didn't realize you had TWO duckunders. Did you practice ducking under both of those? Multiple times? Simulate you are running trains, and want to follow from back to front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top