How do you quit second-guessing your track plan?

[steinjr]

Cool, thanks! Did you have that already done, or was that something you just whipped up?

Just something I whipped up - these are just rough concept sketches showing how a possible mainline could go in.

My own layout also is doughnut shaped - but H0 scale in a 6.5 x 11.5 foot room. In N scale, an equivalent layout would have taken about 4.5 x 7 feet, since the aisles don't scale - the human operator is the same size, no matter whether the trains are H0 scale or N scale

Here is a drawing of my layout (that one I had from before :

Smile,
Stein

 

[dave1905]

8x5 foot area with access from left and below, N scale continuous run with 12" radius:

Quick sketch no 1:

Quick sketch no 2:

Pay attention to Steinjr's advice, he is very good at layout design.

Note on sketch #1 (and Steinjr's own layout) how the main tracks aren't parallel to the edges of the layout. That is very good for the scenic appearance of the layout. Note also how the railroad runs THROUGH the layout and scenery, not just alongside of it. Once again a huge scenic benefit.

If you are serious about trying "operation" (defined in this case as the organized movement of cars to and from industries), one classic operating scheme is to have a loop of track with one or more train length double ended sidings on the "back" side and a siding with industries on the front side with a few random spurs thrown in. The operation is to put an eastward train on one track and a westward train on the other track in the back and that becomes your "staging". Run one train out to the city and do some switching, run the other train around a time or two to give the switching train something to dodge and meet. Then run the east train into the siding in the back, then bring the west train out of "staging", switch the westbound industries/cars at the city, meanwhile running the east train around the loop a couple times to meet the west. Then run the west train into staging. Rearrange the car destinations and do it again.

 

[dave1905]

On Steinjr's plan #2 its a perfect plan if you want a sectional or modular design. The parallel tracks are easy to bridge joints between sections or modules.

If you don't need the sectional/modular approach then a modification to his plan #2 would be to cock the track plan so all the straights are at an angle to the edges of the layout. That will help the senic capabilities. Once again the trains run THROUGH the "land" not along the edges of it.

 

[402drvr]

I don't think I'll ever quit second guessing. THat's why I use nails and not glue.

A friend came over yesterday. He has way more experience in this hobby and within 45 minutes was able to give me some great new ideas for how my future layout will go. Bummer to scrap old plans, but, how exciting to be making new ones.

 

[AllenB]

IMHO - having only one reverse loop is a waste - either have one for both counter clockwise and clockwise or go with none. This way, once through and then you have to back into the reverse loop in order to enter it.

You have double track for 75% of the loop - why not finish iit. If you think not having the remaining section adds to operation you can always out-of-order the additional section.

take care ,,, ken

My thoughts exactly. On my old layout, it was so incredibly boring because I could only run one train at a time (assuming you're going DCC). And I got sick of it asap. BTW...how big are the squares on your grid. I like the shape of your benchwork!

 

[Cjcrescent]

I don't think I'll ever quit second guessing. THat's why I use nails and not glue.

Changes in a trackplan are almost a given. I have always said that a trackplan is just that, a plan, and not a blueprint. This is one reason why all my layouts have been built basically with screws. Easier to remove a screw than a nail.

... Bummer to scrap old plans, but, how exciting to be making new ones.

Yes it is, but I have always kept copies of the plans I've drawn. Layout elements from one plan can often be used on another plan to improve the new plan. I also have a number of layout plan books on hand for this reason as well. I "steal" from these books often.

One thing that really helps with planning a layout is to know from the start what it is you want in a layout. One of the forum members here has developed a track planning form that he lets me use when I'm designing for other modelers. This form "forces" you to put down onto paper what you want. It makes you think of everything from trackwork/operations verses scenic realism, to even benchwork height. It really gets you to decide what you want, and then has you write these things down before you forget them.

It also helps me as the designer, because I now know what the Modeler wants as well as he does, and it makes developing the plan much easier. Its alot better than to get something like, "I want Horseshoe Curve, Saluda Grade, and the Tehachapi Loop, and I got a huge 4x8 space".

 

[dave1905]

One thing that really helps with planning a layout is to know from the start what it is you want in a layout. One of the forum members here has developed a track planning form that he lets me use when I'm designing for other modelers. This form "forces" you to put down onto paper what you want. It makes you think of everything from trackwork/operations verses scenic realism, to even benchwork height. It really gets you to decide what you want, and then has you write these things down before you forget them.

Writing things down helps in several ways.
It forces a person to articulate what they want.
It forces a person to decide among various options.

A subtle result, the more people read their description the more they reinforce the desire.

 

[RW&C]

Also, if there's something they don't like as much, going over it again and again makes them more and more annoyed with it, leading them to change it before the same process sets in post-build. (Just a little armchair psychology.)

 

[Cjcrescent]

Also, if there's something they don't like as much, going over it again and again makes them more and more annoyed with it, leading them to change it before the same process sets in post-build. (Just a little armchair psychology.)

Exactly! Its a lot easier to change it on paper than after its been built.

 

[Trussrod]

Sorry, I thought everyone remembered from my first posts that this is an N scale layout. I get in my own little world sometimes!

I tried to work it with 12.5" curves (that would be 24" in HO) as I was hoping to work in passenger operations. Alas, almost every curve at 12.5 could not fit the layout, so I had to reduce it to 11.5" (roughly 22" in HO), which means passenger may still be an option, but I doubt it. The south edge (Snowshoe Curve) is against a wall...

...so passenger cars may well bang into that wall as they swing the curve. The deep corner is actually curved away from the wall to prevent that, but I just kept banging my head into the space issue.

The north island is going to be a bridge I'm going to have to scratch-build, since it curves (why? Because I managed to stick a turnout into almost every straight run of track!)

I'm going to do at least one short elevated track (the mountain route), two bridges, one tunnel section (the back wall straightaway). The hidden staging is of course New York and New Haven and Boston and... well, anywhere else I need to deliver to.

I've got a lot of scenery ideas, as you can tell... I'm just trying to second guess myself to make sure I'm not going to be limited when I start doing operations.

Everyone's giving some great feedback, including a past suggestion I make the mountain top removable for when the trains derail inside the tunnel!

Say OCN,
From what you've said I noted a couple of things you need to reconsider, first
off you said your limited due to having to put a switches on straight sections, why, there are curved switches for N in both code 55 & 80, at least from Atlas as that's only one I checked, so why limit yourself as you've done? A few curved switches can sure allow a difference in what you can do. I know as my layout has a lot of curves and curved switch are a necessity for me, andthey make areas usable that weren't before. Not to mention allowing you broader curves for longer passenger cars and possibly even Loco's?

The mock-up as your doing is an important step to realizing your overall plan but depending on the length of cars you want to run I'd say it isn't a wise idea to have your curves as sharp as you have them or quite so close to the walls and corners. You can always come off the corner with a regular switch leading into a siding and remember you can use the curved portion of a straight as the main line and the straight leading into the siding on a curve or elsewhere. Try not to limit yourself too much if you can help it.

Give yourself a bit of scenery space at least and like was said before, it's a nice effect to have a siding on the outside here and there to break up the monotony of the rail line always being on the outside edge all around. I'm beginning to rethink my plan too in a couple of areas and I already have the wood ties glued down and rail spiked to them at the Five Oaks Station/ freight house area, so a bit of an exstention might work out well for me in the front which will also change the look of it too and you might be able to do the same too here and there?

Oh, as far as the reverse loop you have, if you put in a turn table in front of the engine house you can always turn your loco's there as desired.

Now is the right time to make changes, you will probably want to redo your track plan to see what's available to you by using curved switches but I think you'll be a lot happier. Remember you can use the curved portion of a regular R or L hand switch on a curve to have a spur go off too or possibly go into a passing track as well. Also with curved switches you can place them anywhere in the curve you like.


HTH

 

[OCN Guy]

My thoughts exactly. On my old layout, it was so incredibly boring because I could only run one train at a time (assuming you're going DCC). And I got sick of it asap. BTW...how big are the squares on your grid. I like the shape of your benchwork!

The squares are 3" in that picture, to help me get as accurate as possible. Thanks for the compliments! Although I think Steinjr should have a full time job designing benchwork for railroaders world wide...

 

[OCN Guy]

Thanks for all the help from everyone here!

 

[Jeremiaha Austin]

2nd Guessing

You, have to come to a point where you tell your self that you are ready to build the bench work and start laying track. Your design will change as you progress in the construction. Layout design and construction are a learning process.

I'm using what I call the Christmas Tree approach to layout design and construction. You can see my plan (QNS&L) on this forum. The plan is designed to take to shows like GTE so it had to be one that will fit into my Freestar Van. Sections have to be around 8' ;7' or under is better.

It is expandable. I planned a Y to a yard and allowed for industry tracks although not drawn at this point. The point is I can change track locations in the yard and experience has shown me I will as I build.

The main design criteria was: N Scale, transportable, large radius curves, long switches, expandable trackage, and modern six axle locomotives.

By the way, after a quick inventory of my N Scale equipment I decided to go with the Delaware and Hudson as a prototype. The paint scheme on the QNS&L C44-9W is attractive but so are the D&H Alco C628's. Although not exact, the track plan will give a good impression of the the Binghampton, NY to Tunnel, NY area.

Happy building,
JA

 

[OCN Guy]

Well, my benchwork was all done, and my track risers installed... I just was overly dissatisfied with my track plan. I knew it was great for watching trains, but when I wanted to move to running them, I wanted more options. And I still wanted to duplicate some of the over and under elements of the WR&N, and the tunnels...

Fortunately I thought of a solution! But this turned into an active thread, and I'm hoping some of the people who've been planning layouts have read some of the good ideas and taken from the advice given!

 

[OCN Guy]

By the way, after a quick inventory of my N Scale equipment I decided to go with the Delaware and Hudson as a prototype. The paint scheme on the QNS&L C44-9W is attractive but so are the D&H Alco C628's. Although not exact, the track plan will give a good impression of the the Binghampton, NY to Tunnel, NY area.

Settling on a prototype or proto-freelance does create challenges on its own. I'll probably start a thread on that, to get some discussion going.
One of the problems is when you want to model a RR, but they don't use any of your favorite trains! Maine Central didn't really like 4-8-4's, so I had to come up with a proto-freelance road. How did you settle on the D&H? were motive power one of your considerations?

 

[OCN Guy]

OK - here was the solution! Since the White River & Northern was my inspiration, I did a quick search on it to find more info on it. I found David K. Smith's blog/website where he talked a little about railroad design. I shot him an email, telling him the problems I was having. he asked some basic questions, got inside my head a little bit on what I was trying to do, and in two hours... sent me this.

I was just looking for some advice, and he modified my track plan into the WR&N! I'm still amazed he was able to change it so effectively. There's definitely something to be said for experience in layout planning. He managed to work all my favorite elements into my bench-work, still kept most of my overall plan... and overhauled it into this!
I'd definitely say he gets all the credit for this track plan. This to me is so different from what I could come up with on my own that it's really not an overhaul, it's really not a modification, it's more a complete new track plan design, incorporating a few of my elements.
I've already ordered most of the track for it... I told him my track budget and I think he even was cognizant of that factor as well! I'm left with only two turnouts and a dozen pieces of flex track left to buy.
notice the tunnels, the double track, the lengthy el track section going through the layout almost as a focal point.
And if I want to add any track work going through the town, there's always trolley lines, which don't have to be connected to the track work at all!

 

[Jeremiaha Austin]

Proto Lancing

I settled on the D&H because I have two C628's on hand that are lettered for the D&H, I have an unlettered PA1, and three undecorated RS11's, and one undecorated RS3. I recently picked up two more D&H C628's at a good price.

I lived near the D&H, for a few years, and like the equipment, and scenery. The fact that it is a bridge line helped in my decision. The Binghampton, NY area I will model hosted interchange with numerous railroads. I have a set of GP18's which will get painted in the Suquehanna yellow and black. Then there is equipment for the LV, EL, PC, CR etc.. The time frame is 1974-1978.

The loop in the plan may end up stacked over another loop for interchange. The area exiting the layout in the upper left will become the Beaver St. yard in Binghampton. Binghampton my end up being called a composite NY name because my version will be considerably smaller than the namesake city.

The idea for the layout is that it is an impression of life, for my enjoyment, and the enjoyment of the guests at the train shows it is taken to.

JA

 

[steinjr]

OK - here was the solution! Since the White River & Northern was my inspiration, I did a quick search on it to find more info on it. I found David K. Smith's blog/website where he talked a little about railroad design. I shot him an email, telling him the problems I was having. he asked some basic questions, got inside my head a little bit on what I was trying to do, and in two hours... sent me this.

Hey - that is a nice looking plan that flows well!

Only thing I would be worried about (provided curve radii and inclines are good for the trains you want to run) is access to the staging tracks in the rear right corner.

If you can beg or otherwise get a bit of extra space along the left edge of the layout - just a foot extra or so, putting the staging tracks down along that edge (which apparently is open, since you can take pictures from that side) - perhaps under a hollow or pop-top hill, then that would help in making sure you can get at things when you have to.

Smile,
Stein

 

[OCN Guy]

Sadly, I'm moving soon... my layout room will be smaller. I've been unable to get in to measure the new room, but eyeballing it shows that my layout will now be wall to wall.
I've worried about that right corner myself, but I found that standing on a chair gives me access to that corner, so if I ever need access, I'll just have to repair damage to scenery later.

 

[OCN Guy]

Shouldn't we petition the US Senate to make a law that every dwelling must include a 48X60 space that is designated for railroad layouts?