New layout dreaming.

[choops]

Possible new layout room. 22' X 14' union pacific turbines pulling long trains. there will be a large yard. and some industries along the way. I prefer not to have any duckunders. here are two drawings of the main lines. Do you ave any thoughts or preferences for either one (A or B) shown below?
Steve

 

[joed2323]

i prefer b

im not sure if its the scenic divider and the ease of getting from around the layout that i like more over a.
in b you can walk in the layout room and walk directly over to the other side of room with ease, versus walking around the layout to get to the other side.

But that shouldnt determine a layout choice, thats just personal preference.

Where do you plan on putting some industries, at the blobs?
To me it seems you have more room for industries/yard on b then a. what industries are you deciding on?

 

[Burlington Bob]

Where do you plan on fitting a large yard at? Double ended or stub? Lead track and service facilities? Double or single track main? Desert, prairie or mountain landscape? Towns or cities? Mostly mainline running or switching or a little of both? I assume this is for an HO layout? What curve radius do you plan on using?

There's an awful lot of things to consider before locking in on a design and filling a large area with a lot ot layout can lead to a lot of work and expense before the trains start running. If time and money are not limiting factors you are a very fortunate person. In that case, I say go big and consider all possibilities. Good luck, Bob.

 

[LoudMusic]

It looks like A could provide larger radius turns without creating reach issues.

 

[Motley]

I like A.

You could add a small 3-4 track yard on the left side, in between the mainlines there.

What about adding a reverse loop, so you can run your trains in either direction. This could be done on one of the end loops.

Even though you prefer mainline running, I would add some industries for operational interests. I also like the idea of running the turbines.

 

[John P]

I want to compromise. Use A, but take out that crossover, and put in a scene divider as in B. That way you have the advantage of B, which is that you can follow a train consistently the maximum distance, but with only two space-eating turnback blobs. You could make each turnback into a helix, and have dual decks if you wanted.

 

[D&J RailRoad]

If the room is 22 x 14, your loops in plan B are in the 22" - 24" radii range.
Plan B will be a little problem reaching to the top right area for scenery or fixing derailments. You might consider opening up the right side of that loop for access to the top wall area.
Plan A could offer a little bit bigger radii loops if you made the peninsulas a little wider but there would be a pretty steep grade in the center penninsula for the cross over unless you moved the cross over a bit more to the right.

 

[joed2323]

plan b could have a helix on one or both of those blobs going up or down, say to a top deck. you could even put staging below the main layout, go big or go home

You could easily have everything you would want with adding a helix, and in those blobs could be open for access, so you could stand in the middle of each helix.

If you didnt want to have more then one helix you could make do with one i suppose

If you didnt want to do a helix and if reach is a issue a hatch could be easily done for access to all areas

Another idea could be to make hidden staging on say the west wall of plan a and b making it appear to be a single mainline on outside track and on the inside track could be hidden staging track starting off the blob going into a tunnel and going near the inside wall.
I like plan b because with a few changes you could have a long single mainline run with staging. Or you can opt for a helix and go bigger

I agree with john p- take out the crossover

 

[choops]

Radii are 30 inch minimum on main line. There will be industries and towns along the way and a large yard Probably along the top wall.
When I design I like to layout the main line runs and bench work and isles first Leaving space for towns and yards. Then when I get something I like I go back and add the towns and yards.
John P i will look at taking out the crossover on plan A
Thanks for the input.
Steve

 

[Dameon]

I like A. It seams to really flow better with the room and the larger central part with the main lines crossing over could make for a dramatic central scenery element.

I see problems with B if you have multiple people in the room and with that door swinging in the way. Also you have some very tight isle spaces by comparison.

 

[otiscnj]

Depends. What types of features do you want to have, scenically? My feeling is that 'A' would provide a better design, as drawn, for large trestles/viaducts, with possibility for trains running underneath them. Of course, from what I've seen of Wyoming, UP doesn't have that type of mainline there, but maybe Weber Canyon in Utah, does?

 

[larski2]

I agree that A is nicer in my eyes if you turn that crossover to an overpass. Dual track mainline running is great. Perfect place for fancy bridgework. A gets my vote.

 

[Cjcrescent]

... Do you ave any thoughts or preferences for either one (A or B) shown below?
Steve

Actually Steve, while I do have thoughts about them, (industries, yard location & type, spurs, etc.), my preference would be neither one. I fully believe that any double track mainline that is parallel to each over the entire route around the layout, takes away 1/2 the challenge of operating a layout, thus it becomes boring in 1/2 the time.

Frankly I'd prefer a long single track line with sidings. Thus forcing the engineer(s) to worry about getting out of the way of those big reefer trains pulled by the turbines. They have to plan their moves, and try to be efficient enough to get their jobs done with minimal, or no, delay to the turbines. Also, believe it or not, a single track line actually gives you more room for those ancillary things that really make the layout work, industries, spurs, yards, loco facilities, scenery, etc.

A single track railroad is a lot more fun to operate, even with one man at the controls. You could start your turbines, getting the perishables to Eastern markets and then start a local working the industries along the route. Then while the turbines are rolling over the layout, you'll have to plan your moves with the local to get its job done while staying out of the way of the hotshot.

 

[choops]

Took 6 months to buy our short sale home but was worth the wait and aggravation. Here is the room for a new layout with 34" squares. also a rough draft of a plan. thoughts. more sidings will be added. I am still considering a single main vs. a double main.

Steve

 

[otiscnj]

Choops,

A few things occured to me, looking at your plan.

1) Only one route into/out of your yard. Means somebody's going to have to either back in, or back out to get on/off the main. By adding a switch in one of several locations along the yard lead, you would effectively add a 'wye,' and solve this problem. Look at the tracks near Borrie, south of Cheyenne for an idea.

2) You want to run trains that require turbines, but your yard tracks are fairly short(average about 5-6') the way things look. Not necessarly a problem, but tripling a train might get old fast.

 

[otiscnj]

Choops,

Here's a quick and dirty mod to your latest plan that uses 26" raduis curves in most places, standard, with a few additional options drawn in for 'ideas. I went with your original dimensions of 22' x 14'.

Section along the long wall has multiple mainlines that you can keep or delete. Didn't check this section for clearances, although the grade might not be constant. In the upper right corner are areas to putting in sidings to hold trains for clearance down the hill. If you got with a sub 26" mainline you might also be able to fit in a reversing section at the top of the grade for 'operational interest.

EDT = End of Double track(again, this was 'quick and dirty') You might also be able to include a wye for pushers, with the tail heading down towards the door.

I'm still not satisfied with the length of the yard tracks. If you are going to run turbines, you want a decent length train. 7'10" yard track isn't long enough(dimensions on the plan shown in feet, and fraction of feet). Each box represents 1 square foot (12" x 12").

 

[choops]

Thanks guys.
The yard is the one area I am not happy with yet. I have been making it bigger but joining it to the loop is proving difficult. I may make some changes to this area or move the yard to another location.
Steve

 

[lmackattack]

I like option A as you can follow the train and dont have to run to the other side of the layout at any point. It also seams to flow better with less curves needed to make it all fit. Even if you put a divider in the middle the train will reapear on the side that you are already watching from. this makes the layout seam larger when you see the train leave and come back into view. You also have the option for a swing out bridge near the doorway if you see the need down the road to have a nice big bridge span.

 

[choops]

This is the latest design. I am still a ways off from starting to build. I need to finish the rest of the basement first but getting closer.

 

[railfan]

Wow....that would be some miles of track in N scale . Me like that design for sure!



Mike