Stein,
Not harsh at all and much closer to what I expected from more folks here. But let me explain something for a minute or 2. Unlike most of you, I have no railroad experience or desire to recreate a replica of a specific region, operation, etc., so I can "play" engineer or relive a former/imaginary life on the railroad. If I had my druthers, I'd have a 1' shelf layout running around every nook and cranny in my house, like some LHSs do. I'd run continuous trains along that route as often as I could and I'd be perfectly content. Even at 63, I love to drive with no destination in mind and I see no reason to change that "image" for a model railroad.
Unfortunately, the shelf is not an option, so I'm trying to wrap as much open running as I can into a small space while giving it some operational elements, mostly to please you folks. I don't even know at this point if I'll ever get to adding scenery, though I'd like to. I don't sit for hours reading train magazines trying to understand how any part of the whole system works or longing for the day I can be an engineer, etc. I simply want to lay down some tracks and have a train follow them wherever they lead. I know that may sound silly to you and cause you to wonder why I'm bothering, but that's my total interest in all this. I love to watch trains, but I don't dwell on what's actually happening as they move from place to place, be it a yard or the open road.
All I'm pretty much looking for here is a thumbs up/down on specific parts of the layout, will they work or won't they or can they be made a little better/more functional. I'm open to ideas, but they need to meet my open running goals as opposed to someone else's vision of how they'd use the space to meet their operational requirements for switching, industries, etc. My original plan was simply to model the open running between El Paso and Tucson with nothing but desert scenery and only a few spurs to no place in particular.
I had expected some of you would be able to put aside your visions for how you'd use the sapce and help me make my elements a little more functional or suggest a few elments I might consider adding to do specific things without completely throwing the baby out with the bath water, so to speak. I'm quite pleased with the comments I've gotten so far, as far as they go, but no one has commented on things like the steepness of the incline, the radius of the curves, etc. I hate to just assume that stuff will work until I get to construction and find they won't.
Anyway, I had a steep incline in my first design and was told it was too steep, so out it came. Then I had that convoluted switching area in the upper section and was told that wouldn't work either, so I redesigned that whole area. Someone suggested I integrate my separate top level into the layout, so I added a longer incline to make that happen (and I like the result, trains running up/down the incline on both sides of the center). I added some specific operations too; the horse ranch and small town/cattle loading area in the upper section, the meat processing plant in the lower section, and the passneger/sight-seeing train. And you're telling me I have no operational/functional vision. That I don't get. Do I have to have a big yard and town with several delivery/pickup points and then some more switching/delivery points 2-3 more places along the route to satisfy folks here? What is so wrong with a layout for mostly open running? And why can't folks make suggestions with that goal in mind?
That said, I have already nixed the helix idea on my own as I played with the design most of yesterday. It didn't save any track and just complicated both the building process and the ability to build in sections. I also decided to definitely add the standalone storage area to give me more options in the lower section and to maybe divide the layout into more sections for easier handling the "3" times a year it has to be moved. And when I say "stored", I'm not talking about laying them on their sides or anything like that for days on end. Each piece will simply be set on a bed, card tables, or floor in a bedroom that is off the living/dining room area where the layout is. They will be dismantled in the morning and put back together before bedtime, the family events take place between noon and 6:00 or so. And, now that I think about it, it's really only 2 times a year because the table is not used Christmas Eve. That leaves just Easter and Thanksgiving at our house where the table is used.
But, be all that as it may, I doubt many would have a problem if the layout were unwrapped to form a simple 20x3 loop to loop shelf or "L"-shaped layout with a mountian grade along the back side. I see this as kind of like the left side of the plan found on page 50 in Kalbach's 101 Track Plans book and very much like the N-scale shelf layout I saw at a local club a few weeks ago. No, they are not the same, but this is nothing more than flat open track with some spurs running along the front of a shelf and a second level running along the back. They are connected by loops/inclines on both ends with the high point in the middle and making continuous running up, down, and around possible.
I must be missing something because I see a fairly simple layout wrapped around itself. Maybe it's just the sectional aspect people don't get, but I'm determined to make that work. Eventually this will be unwrapped and placed permanently in a back bedroom, perhaps before it's even completed. Based on our lifestyle of travel, I see this taking 2-3 years to get to the point where scenery comes into play and another 2-3 years or more for that. The priority willl be getting up and running, not trying to make it look pretty.
And, yes, it's my layout, but I'm still hoping for some help to make it the best it can be given my goals. I also think it can be changed fairly easily if those goals change. The majority of work will be the center "mountain" and the sectional benchwork. My latest iteration (attached) has nothing but straight track at the points where I could turn it into 4 sections instead of only 2. If I'm willing to try to tackle those, what else is wrong that will make the layout less enjoyable "for me"? If you have Kalmbach's 101 track Plans book, take a look at plan 57, the Baltimore & Hudson, on page 32. Half the layout is yard (which I don't want but realize I have to have a place to store running stock) and there are only 4 real structures on the whole layout. Once out of the yard, the rest is open running.
BTW, I really do appreciate your honesty, as well as all your other posts I've read here, and I hope you'll respond again. If nothing else, this gives me another opportunity to express my goals and thoughts. Maybe some folks will take another look with those in mind, but I think I'm ready to start buidling the latest design as time permits. Please don't anyone stop commenting because I'm still a long way from the point of no return.
BTW, I took out the center line, so don't forget that you only "see" each half, upper and lower, as you move around the layout counter-clockwise from lower left to upper left and back. I also forgot to note there is a depot setup (Durango) near the entrance to the Passenger Car Storage area. I may also replace the Mountain Top/Lake with an old mining town (Silverton). If there is anything close to a real railroad, it would be the D&S Scenic Railroad between Durango and Silverton in Colorado.
ROFTL.
) got thick skin, nobody wants to appear foolish - Apart from us for trying....... which returns us to the beginning.....
