I will look into that, thanks.
Layout design question
- Thread starter sauced07
- Start date
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.
I will look into that, thanks.
Part of my brain wants to reflect Canadian influence in the motive power. The CN was involved with the Central Vermont railroad. Perhaps some CP involvement could be reflected in paint schemes, The CP could view my railroad as competition with CN's Central Vermont with a few better connections on the route. Interchanges with the Boston and Albany would be closer to New York in Pittsfield and with the Boston and Maine in North Adams.
I would suggest one thing to you . When you envision your empire , see it as what you want it to look like when finished and also think of it in terms of years . A layout can take several years to decades to get to the point where YOU say it is finished . A room size layout like what you are talking could easily chew up that amount of time . There is a thread started by Greg , I believe in the general discussions , that asks how complete is your railroad and how long have you been working on it . If you read this thread it may put your timeline into a better perspective for you . I found , for myself , looking at my railroad this way was a good thing . I don't get disappointed when I go up there because it is not done , and when other things come up and the railroad takes a back burner that's OK too . It is not going anywhere and this also helps a bit with cost , you can wait until you stumble across a good deal to buy equipment . Just another viewpoint.
Do you subscribe to Model Railroader? If you do, at their website, you will need to create a log-in so you can access their Videos section. Here you can gain access to many digital track plans. In the Black header, Click Videos, then Click layouts and then 3D track plans and there are hundreds of track plans available. Although you certainly might find a track plan that would drop right into the space you have available, it's more likely you will find a track plan that you really like and by adding or subtracting length in a couple dimensions, make fit your space. Remember, one of the most important aspects of designing a layout, is curve radii. The larger the curve radii the better. It is also certainly possible to design your own layout. In any case I would highly recommend that you purchase the book: Track Planing for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong.
Thanks for your thoughts. I will look at my plans in sections, while imagining the final design. The benchwork will be easy and truth be told if I'm gonna do some of it I might as well do all of it. But the track and scenery is a different story. I may lay the mainline track just so I can stretch a locos legs from time to time but I'll focus on one area at a time.
Now that you mention it, I may still have his book somewhere. I looked at subscribing to Model Railroader but $99 a year was a bit steep.
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)
I will look into that, thanks.
Ok, I had to shrink the layout down a bit due to the fact that there are other things going on in the basement that are fighting for space (ain't that always the way). I'll clue you guys into what I'm going for here. It's a what if scenario. Basically taking the line that runs through Conneticut up through to Pittsfield ( old New Haven line now Housatonic) then the line that runs from Pittsfield to North Adams and making it one railroad. Heres the kicker though, if you look at a map theres a place on the Boston and Maine just west of North Adams called Pownal. Just above it is Bennington which used to be the Rutland Railroad. My what if is what if tracks were laid between Pownal and Bennington? And what if a railroad that ran the line from Conneticut all the way to North Adams ran that line took over the Rutland when it had its issues in I believe 1963? That would give you a good sized regional railroad sort of parallel with the Central Vermont. Where I'm at now is theorizing how that change would effect the make up of tracks that are currently there. I will be modeling in the 50's-60's but the main tracks there now would be roughly the same then with more yard and industrial trackage.
The issue for me is, after working for several actual railroads, I understand fully the flow of rail traffic and why things are done certain ways so I need to keep it all plausible and realistic from that standpoint. Take the stretch of track of the Boston and Maine between North Adams and Pownal. At first I was going to use trackage rights on my layout for that stretch. After thinking about it I realized a railroad would not want a weak link like that in their operating plan so they would undoubtedly lay their mainline parallel to the B&M with perhaps even an interchange track in between somewhat like Millers Falls Ma where the B&M paralleled the Central Vermont for a bit and interchanged with them there. It was always cool to roll through Millers Falls on the NECR as a Pan Am train would be coming through.
It's interesting how a few miles of track, if laid, would change the makeup of towns and industries and also the railroads that served them. Stations would be in different locations than they wound up being in, yards would be different or even in different areas all together. Anyways if you've made it this far in my babbling I hope you see where my plans are going. Looking at a map of the area is really the only way it all makes sense.
The issue for me is, after working for several actual railroads, I understand fully the flow of rail traffic and why things are done certain ways so I need to keep it all plausible and realistic from that standpoint. Take the stretch of track of the Boston and Maine between North Adams and Pownal. At first I was going to use trackage rights on my layout for that stretch. After thinking about it I realized a railroad would not want a weak link like that in their operating plan so they would undoubtedly lay their mainline parallel to the B&M with perhaps even an interchange track in between somewhat like Millers Falls Ma where the B&M paralleled the Central Vermont for a bit and interchanged with them there. It was always cool to roll through Millers Falls on the NECR as a Pan Am train would be coming through.
It's interesting how a few miles of track, if laid, would change the makeup of towns and industries and also the railroads that served them. Stations would be in different locations than they wound up being in, yards would be different or even in different areas all together. Anyways if you've made it this far in my babbling I hope you see where my plans are going. Looking at a map of the area is really the only way it all makes sense.
otiscnj
Well-Known Member
Although 'going huge' has its appeals, particularly if you follow the hobby press, experience has taught me that you don't need to go huge, to have a very decent model railroad. The larger the layout, the more effort it takes to design and build it, unless you do something very simple, like an oval with 90" diameter curves. 12x17 is a very respectable sized layout. If you have the room, when you get that done to a certain degree, you can always expand further.
Good luck, and keep us posted.
Good luck, and keep us posted.
One of the determining factors for shrinking the size, other than other things vying for the space , was the cost and labor factor. I have the new house to work on and I'm trying to work on my ol shortbed truck so I didn't want this railroad project to bog me down. This is meant to be an enjoyable hobby after all.
santafewillie
Same Ol' Buzzard
Iron Horseman
Well-Known Member
Been looking at the maps for a while now, and I like your plan. It would be another New York, Ontario and Western Railway type situation but certainly plausible to me. Certainly would be facing direct competition from the Delware & Hudson. Maybe the hook would be to advertise to the Canadian railroads as a single road, quicker link, to the Atlantic (Connecticut) ports, instead of all the way up around Main through Nova Scotia.
Part of my brain wants to reflect Canadian influence in the motive power. The CN was involved with the Central Vermont railroad. Perhaps some CP involvement could be reflected in paint schemes, The CP could view my railroad as competition with CN's Central Vermont with a few better connections on the route. Interchanges with the Boston and Albany would be closer to New York in Pittsfield and with the Boston and Maine in North Adams.
I would suggest one thing to you . When you envision your empire , see it as what you want it to look like when finished and also think of it in terms of years . A layout can take several years to decades to get to the point where YOU say it is finished . A room size layout like what you are talking could easily chew up that amount of time . There is a thread started by Greg , I believe in the general discussions , that asks how complete is your railroad and how long have you been working on it . If you read this thread it may put your timeline into a better perspective for you . I found , for myself , looking at my railroad this way was a good thing . I don't get disappointed when I go up there because it is not done , and when other things come up and the railroad takes a back burner that's OK too . It is not going anywhere and this also helps a bit with cost , you can wait until you stumble across a good deal to buy equipment . Just another viewpoint.
John Allen apparently came up with the idea of "Givens and Druthers". A bit of an odd term, but it's a sound concept.
"Givens" are just that. Things that are "given", i.e. cannot be changed. No use planning a 20 x 40 layout if your available space is 10 x 14. They can sometimes be open to negotiation, as you mentioned above that possibly you won't use the entire space. But they're a good starting point.
"Druthers", as is in "I'd ruther (rather), are things that you desire for the layout. These are more flexible and tend to be modified as the design changes. You start with the basics. For example, I love steam, so for me a roundhouse is a very desirable feature. Modeling BNSF in the modern era? Then a roundhouse would be colossal waste of space.
I would suggest that you consider both of these elements when designing. You don't have to get super fancy, though you can find suggested "Givens and druthers" forms on the web. But at least get some general ideas. What era? What location? If not a specific geographic location, at least the general idea. Rocky Mountains, Florida, something in between? Nothing wrong with a "generic" locale, but at least have some idea of what kind of elements you'd like. The same goes for operations. Continuous run? Switching? Passenger trains? City setting, rural, or country.
Start big, toss it all out there. Of course, you typically won't get it all (For example, no matter how hard I try, a 4 track PRR mainline, city, mountains, mines, engine terminal, passenger station, freight yard and industrial area for switching isn't going to fit into my garage unless maybe I switch to Z scale. But put them all down for starters. Then go through and pick the ones you want most, while also picking ones that are practical. In my case, a 4 track main would make my layout look more like a slotcar track, so that's out. But maybe I can do a (small) station, and have a place for an engine terminal.
Oh, and one thing I can't emphasize enough... Allow for staging tracks. Yards aren't supposed to be parking lots for trains. Having off layout staging so you can store some additional trains is valuable on nearly any layout.
"Givens" are just that. Things that are "given", i.e. cannot be changed. No use planning a 20 x 40 layout if your available space is 10 x 14. They can sometimes be open to negotiation, as you mentioned above that possibly you won't use the entire space. But they're a good starting point.
"Druthers", as is in "I'd ruther (rather), are things that you desire for the layout. These are more flexible and tend to be modified as the design changes. You start with the basics. For example, I love steam, so for me a roundhouse is a very desirable feature. Modeling BNSF in the modern era? Then a roundhouse would be colossal waste of space.
I would suggest that you consider both of these elements when designing. You don't have to get super fancy, though you can find suggested "Givens and druthers" forms on the web. But at least get some general ideas. What era? What location? If not a specific geographic location, at least the general idea. Rocky Mountains, Florida, something in between? Nothing wrong with a "generic" locale, but at least have some idea of what kind of elements you'd like. The same goes for operations. Continuous run? Switching? Passenger trains? City setting, rural, or country.
Start big, toss it all out there. Of course, you typically won't get it all (For example, no matter how hard I try, a 4 track PRR mainline, city, mountains, mines, engine terminal, passenger station, freight yard and industrial area for switching isn't going to fit into my garage unless maybe I switch to Z scale. But put them all down for starters. Then go through and pick the ones you want most, while also picking ones that are practical. In my case, a 4 track main would make my layout look more like a slotcar track, so that's out. But maybe I can do a (small) station, and have a place for an engine terminal.
Oh, and one thing I can't emphasize enough... Allow for staging tracks. Yards aren't supposed to be parking lots for trains. Having off layout staging so you can store some additional trains is valuable on nearly any layout.
N
NP2626
Guest
Do you subscribe to Model Railroader? If you do, at their website, you will need to create a log-in so you can access their Videos section. Here you can gain access to many digital track plans. In the Black header, Click Videos, then Click layouts and then 3D track plans and there are hundreds of track plans available. Although you certainly might find a track plan that would drop right into the space you have available, it's more likely you will find a track plan that you really like and by adding or subtracting length in a couple dimensions, make fit your space. Remember, one of the most important aspects of designing a layout, is curve radii. The larger the curve radii the better. It is also certainly possible to design your own layout. In any case I would highly recommend that you purchase the book: Track Planing for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong.
Thanks for your thoughts. I will look at my plans in sections, while imagining the final design. The benchwork will be easy and truth be told if I'm gonna do some of it I might as well do all of it. But the track and scenery is a different story. I may lay the mainline track just so I can stretch a locos legs from time to time but I'll focus on one area at a time.
Now that you mention it, I may still have his book somewhere. I looked at subscribing to Model Railroader but $99 a year was a bit steep.
N
NP2626
Guest
A one year subscription to Model Railroader is $42.95. If you add in access to the MR Archive and MR Video Plus then the price is $99.95 per year. I am a subscriber to Model Railroader All Access and feel it is worth the cost. I especially like MR Video Plus; but, don't know if it is available with just the magazine, without the M.R. Digital Archive. You could ask. I think simply subscribing to Model Railroader allows access to many of the videos and maybe even the 3D track plans. Again, you can ask M.R. what is included with a subscription to the magazine.
otiscnj
Well-Known Member
When I started my 'Philly & Scranton,' which you can read about in the 'Layout Design & Construction' section, I half jokingly came up with 'The 15 Year Plan.' 5 years to design it, 5 years to build it, and 5 years to run it. I started when I was about 50, which would take me up until I'm about 65. By that time, we may be ready to retire and downsize, which is why I'm not planning any further out than that.
At this point, I'm going into year 6. Last year was a combination of designing and building, however more focused on building in the 2nd half of the year. I expect that from here on out, most of the focus will be on building, and hopefully starting to run portions of it.
I like your concept of a CP line to compete with the CN's Central Vermont. Tying together several pre-existing lines always has my interest as a 'freelancer.' Sometimes I'd try and do something like that in the old Railroad Tycoon II simulation game.
I'm currently speculating about 'what if' the New Haven hadn't sunk the money into Connecticut trolleys and the Westchester. Would they have improved the O&W? Or bought it out right?Or electrified into Maybrook? Or to Boston? And if they had decided that the O&W wasn't worth it, would they have perhaps linked up to/with the Erie in some way, given how much of the O&W paralleled it? My perception is that they could have used the funds they sunk into the Westchester and trolleys for a lot of other things, which might have turned out better for them, long term.
At this point, I'm going into year 6. Last year was a combination of designing and building, however more focused on building in the 2nd half of the year. I expect that from here on out, most of the focus will be on building, and hopefully starting to run portions of it.
I like your concept of a CP line to compete with the CN's Central Vermont. Tying together several pre-existing lines always has my interest as a 'freelancer.' Sometimes I'd try and do something like that in the old Railroad Tycoon II simulation game.
I'm currently speculating about 'what if' the New Haven hadn't sunk the money into Connecticut trolleys and the Westchester. Would they have improved the O&W? Or bought it out right?Or electrified into Maybrook? Or to Boston? And if they had decided that the O&W wasn't worth it, would they have perhaps linked up to/with the Erie in some way, given how much of the O&W paralleled it? My perception is that they could have used the funds they sunk into the Westchester and trolleys for a lot of other things, which might have turned out better for them, long term.
new guy
Active Member
No magazine can match the forum for information and examples. Throwing down a couple of loops while the thing susses out is the way to go. Give you a chance to SEE how much room is required for this and that and the ability to change it up "as needed" while the scenery takes shape.
I was talking with the wife while down visiting my daughter and grandson and we were discussing the basement. I was able to reserve 12x39 feet total for the layout. I am still going to build it in sections so I don't kill myself or my funds. While I was following existing trackage on Google trying to formulate my plan I realized that all existing trackage would be totally different had the railroad formed as per my "what if" scenario. So now I am going to start printing out track maps of the Housatonic, the line from Pittsfield to North Adams and the Rutland railroad. Once those are all printed so I can lay them out where they would fall it will give me a better idea how yards and such would have shuffled around due to the different operating plan.
otiscnj
Well-Known Member
Maps are a good way to go. Photos too. If you know the line, there may be several spots that you'll want to include, and others that can be skipped-its called selective compression. Additionally, although 12 x 39 seems very big, you'll still need to 'scale things down (run shorter trains) or else you will run out of room very quickly. Remember a scale mile in HO is like 62' or so. Good luck!
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)