I have designed a number of layouts for fellow modelers and am working on another right now.
I am interested in knowing the following about anyones layout.
Who has multi decks?
How high is each deck?
How deep are your scenes?
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room?
Do you use staging?
Is your staging hidden or visable?
Is your mainline single or double track?
Do you model a prototype or freelance?
Do you model a specific era?
Is your layout continuous or point to point?
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space?
Feel free to answer as many or as few of these questions as interest you.
Thanks
Sheldon
Quote from: atlanticcentral on April 03, 2007, 11:36:23 PM
I have designed a number of layouts for fellow modelers and am working on another right now.
Sheldon : Is this a spoof?
If it is as you say, I am surprised that you have not yet come to some conclusions for yourself on the questions you ask.
Regards
New ideas to spark other new ideas are always helpful.
Is HO the scale in question?
I double track the mainline, freelance, no specific era, I use EZ Track risers for my grades and above layout decks, helix takes in a lot of space and needs to be hidden, usually, in a mountain, I like continuous layouts, and my sentences are long strings as you can see.
Have at it.
Jonathan
I'll use my LAST layout to answer your survey. My NEW layout, still in the planning stages, will have the same properties:
Who has multi decks? I do; three levels.
How high is each deck? 36" 48" 58" on average. The layout starts at 36" and ended at 62", corkscrewing around the walls (no helix)
How deep are your scenes? Averaged 12", but some areas were as deep as 3'. No track was more than 2' from the edge of the layout.
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room? Corkscrew; no helix.
Do you use staging? Yes.
Is your staging hidden or visable? Hidden.
Is your mainline single or double track? Single track.
Do you model a prototype or freelance? Specific prototype, real locations.
Do you model a specific era? Yes. I started modeling 1950, but I've slid back to 1948.
Is your layout continuous or point to point? Both.
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space? The layout room was 13x32, the layout footprint was 7x25 with a 6x8 blob on one end. Since it was all shelves, the layout was only around 220 square feet.
(http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/553/Layout_overview_1_2_.JPG)
Orsonroy, Jonathan,
Thank you for sharing your info. Yes it is an HO question because, at least up to now, it is the only scale I have worked in, for myself or others.
Stewart,
I have very definate conclusions of my own on these questions, especially as they apply to me personally and my own layout. But there is always more to learn. What I learn may or may not change my conclusions, but I still want to learn it.
As for for your "spoof" comment, there is a regular member of this board building a layout from a plan I prepared as we write, not to mention one member of our local group whos layout design was the brain storm of me and a third member and brought to plan by my drafting skills. That layout is now 90% operational and in scenery construction phases. And, in years past I have done other layouts for other modelers.
Sheldon
That would be me.
The layout is in a 26x20 building designed as a two car garage, but without garage doors, though the framing for them is in place and hidden.
The layout itself is 26x 17 with two penninsulas and a 4x3 spur. The staging yard may or may not be hidden and is at 36", as is the spur and the base of the penninsulas. Most of the layout will be at 50" with most on two or three foot deep shelving. The yard is a bit deeper, especially the engine facility. Each penninsula will have a two loop helix.
Gene
Sheldon,
I am glad you asked these questions ... specially because, in hindsight, I wish they had been asked about 4 years ago when I built my HO layout. I did not 'research' as I should have.
It had been a long time since I had done any model RR'ing and it would have been a great help to me to have thought more seriously about all of your layout questions.
I have no plans to tear down what I did model and begin again, but I think all who are thinking about building a layout do well to seriously consider each of the points you mentioned.
It's a 'great primer' for those who are ready to take the plunge into a more permanent layout, or at least in planning for one.
Here are my answers regading my layout, to your questions, Sheldon.
Who has multi decks? (I don't)
How high is each deck? (48" above floor)
How deep are your scenes? (widest area anywhere on layout is 2 feet)
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room? (no)
Do you use staging? (That's the last thing I will be adding)
Is your staging hidden or visable? (visible for now, eventually after scenery, hidden)
Is your mainline single or double track? (double track-Atlas flex NS code #100)
Do you model a prototype or freelance? (ICRR with a 'sprinkling' of FDDM&S on an 'imaginary', but prototypically possible, Iowa division)
Do you model a specific era? (mostly late steam and early Green Diamond)
Is your layout continuous or point to point? (continuous)
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space? (layout area 163 sq ft ... total family room is approximately 475 sq feet)
lanny
Who has multi decks? Not really.....just a hidden loop underneath a section of the layout.
How high is each deck? Upper elevation is a 6 inch climb.
How deep are your scenes? Have some scenery in back corners that may take a step stool to reach, but all the track is easily accessible from the operating area.
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room? U-shaped layout that climbs around the walls.
Do you use staging? I haven't got that far.
Is your staging hidden or visable? If I use it, it will probably be visible.
Is your mainline single or double track? Double now, but am looking at going back to single.
Do you model a prototype or freelance? Purely freelance.......did the rivet counting thing in another hobby and got sick of it.
Do you model a specific era? I like to think I do, but my "era" may cover more years than the next fellow's "era".
Is your layout continuous or point to point? Continuous.....I find watching a slow freighter or a loaded Shay very relaxing to watch as it crawls through the valleys and up the grades.
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space? 7 foot down left wall.....10 feet across top and 9.5 feet down right side......islands at each end for continuous run. I took over the third bedroom upstairs.
I built L-girder and cookie cutter top.........tweaking the plan now........the more I read, the more I see areas to improve.
And that right there is one of the appeals of this hobby.....it never ends. When I was doing automotive replicas, I would finish one then on to the next...etc. Never did like the periods between builds.
The "dynamic" aspect of this hobby is also appealing. Cars just sit there. Trains are inter-active.
Build on
Sid
Gene,
Thank you, I did not think it proper to share your personal business without your permission. I figured if you wanted to share that info you would speak up as you did.
To all,
As I have mentioned to Gene off this board, I am currently rebuilding my own layout so it will be able to be moved to our new home in a few years. This process, combined with the design of a layout for another member of our local group, has led me to some new ideas that break some long established "rules" of layout design. And the results are quite pleasing.
Again, thank you to all who share their layouts, ideas and thoughts. I will monitor this closely for ideas as it progresses. I will also follow up with a list of concepts I have developed for track planning in general.
Sheldon
Sheldon : So, are you going to share your answers to the questions, with us?
Learning is a shared experience, when one has your experience.
Regards
OK, here are the answers to these questions as it relates to my personal layout. These choices are by no means right for everyone. I will share some more layout planning ideas soon.
Who has multi decks? - Yes I do.
How high is each deck? - This varies a lot among multi level layouts I have seen, but for me, 36†and 60†seems to work the best if you want deeper scenes, see below.
How deep are your scenes? - I have found that with multi deck layouts, scene depth and deck separation are directly related. This may seem obvious, but you would be surprised by some of what others have tried. I find that decks need to be separated by at least the depth of the smaller deck. Examples - if you decks are only 12†deep, you can get away with 12†separation, but, in the case of my layout, with a 36’ deep scene on the lower deck and a 24†deep scene on the upper deck, you need at least 24†separation for good viewing.
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room? - I tried to avoid the helix in my first multi deck layout, but have since changed my mind. I have come to like the idea of keeping the track work, and benchwork on each deck almost level. The main reason for this is to keep the viewing positions similar. Standing is good for the 60†level, sitting for the 36†level.
Do you use staging? - Yes, and lots of it. But I prefer to decentralize it when possible.
Is your staging hidden or visible? - I used to think it should be hidden, but am becoming more and more comfortable with it being visible, like at a lower level of 24â€, just below the front edge of the scenic lower level.
Is your mainline single or double track? - Mine is double track, I like the action of big railroads.
Do you model a prototype or freelance? - I freelance with connections to real prototypes, C&O, WM, B&O.
Do you model a specific era? - My layout, fall 1954
Is your layout continuous or point to point? - Continuous, to keep some proper balance of mainline running to switching activity. I like both and want the balance between them to represent the prototype.
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space? - My current layout room is 22 x40. The layout surface covers about half of that and will have a double track mainline about 8 scale miles long. When we move in a few years I will most likely have a little more space. The modular and movable nature of my new design will make it easy to expand it to fill the largr space. I will comment more on this aspect in my next post.
Sheldon
Here is the breakdown of my layout:
Who has multi decks? not yet. My next expansion will be a second level above the mine branch to serve more mines.
How high is each deck? 44"
How deep are your scenes? None more than 2 feet
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room? no
Do you use staging? yes
Is your staging hidden or visable? Visible and also used as an interchange
Is your mainline single or double track? Single track with sidings
Do you model a prototype or freelance? Prototype with some fictional elements added in. For instance I model the Athens subdivision of the Chessie System. After the mines played out in the 30's the line was all but forgotten by the C&O. I model it as if the mines were still active and the line was an important link in the system.
Do you model a specific era? Chessie System and Penn Central during the early 70's.
Is your layout continuous or point to point? It's continuous but I operate it as a point to point. Continuous run is for show and for my daughter to run her Thomas train in circles.
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space? approx 342 suare feet
Sheldon,
Welcome. I knew you'd keep personal affairs personal.
I noticed that my answer was a bit too brief for total accuracy. The design is, in fact, a loop, but since most trains will begin and end in staging, it will appear to be point to point.
In era, it's the end of steam - actually a bit beyond the end of most steam, especially for C&O, as it is set in late summer/early fall, 1957, yet C&O still has a lot of steam. The rationale is they use trackage rights on the VT&P a lot, and VT&P has limited diesel facilities at best. VT&P is still steam for two reasons. One, like N&W it is a coal hauling railroad and why buy a cow when milk's so cheap? Second, their incorporation papers demands that only coal fired locomotives be used for power. It took company lawyers several years to find away to amend a clause that is specifically stated as being unchangeable.
The layout room has a work space in it which is just about the right size and the building has an outside storage area for garden/lawn things and a small covered patio.
All in all, if you are looking for a train barn (our term for the building) or a layout, I'd suggest contacting Sheldon.
No money was exchanged in consideration of the last sentence.
Most town/place names are taken from family members/grandchildren. The main town's name comes from the name of the small Shenandoah Valley city that is the setting of one of my books and several published short stories. One river, an industrial area, and the two ends of staging are named for real places in Virginia and West Virginia.
Gene
hello yes i have a double deck layout it is 2 decks, it has some single and some double mainline trackage, it has many passing sidings, the size of the layout is 10 feet by 20 feet(one car garage). I do model a single railroad, it is BNSF the era is modern, i also have a few UP locomotives. the mainline is all connected by helixes, the minimum radius is 28'' i do use staging and yes it is hidden but for the staging to get to it i just use a grade, not a helix. the layout has 1 big yard and it also has an intermodal yard/loading area, coal mine with a coal loader, gas refinery, milk refinery, and 3 warehouses where boxcars and covered rib sided hoppers go, the layout is based on actual locations throughout Cajon Pass california and barstow etc.
hope this helps :)
regards
Who has multi decks? Not me.
How high is each deck?
How deep are your scenes? 30"
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room? Nope
Do you use staging? I plan to, if my dad lets me expand my layout.
Is your staging hidden or visable? It would be visible.
Is your mainline single or double track? Single
Do you model a prototype or freelance? Yes. The T&P
Do you model a specific era? Yes, the 1950s
Is your layout continuous or point to point? Continuous
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space? 5x9 feet.
My layout is 4 feet above the floor and single deck, although I do have a 2nd "deck" that is quite small 9 X 3.5 feet where my logging town and mill will reside.
The majority of my scenes are 2 feet deep as I used 2 inch insulation board for a foundation supported by "L" brackets off the walls (no legs) I don't have staging but do have a small yard and access to staging area (hole saw ;D)
The layout is a continuos loop single track with passing sidings, as I like just watching trains roll by.
I guess I'm a freelancer, but most of my equiptment is lettered for CN and I try to stay within the 1930-50 range. I have a few Canadian buildings but most are kitbashes or scratchbuilt.
As for size, about a 350 sqr. ft. "L" shape with the bottom corner cut off at an angle, had to go around furnace and chimney.
brad
The Lorraine Valley & James River Railway - my H0 layout.
Single deck, except over hidden yards.
Deck rises from 36" to 60"
Depth mostly 2' but varies from 6" to 4'.
The LV&JRR uses 3 helices and an around the wall for elevation changes.
Staging is in two hidden yards and a barge operation.
Mainline is single track with four passing sidings 9' or longer.
The LV&JRR is a free lanced bridging line between the CNR and the CPR, set somewhere in the Rocky Mountains of Western Canada.
The layout is set in 1961 but there are some anachronisms.
The layout is point to point for operation, continuous for show.
Floor space is just over 400 square feet spread through two rooms.
The present control system is DCC, 8 amp booster plus power manager. Before that, the layout used automatic (computer assisted) block control. The present layout was started in 1984 but has parts going back to 1957. The layout started off with all electric remote control turnouts operated from a central panel but now has mostly mechanical remote control turnouts with the controls distributed around the layout.
Below is a panorama of the larger of the two layout rooms. For an enlarged view, click on the link below the photo.
(http://members.shaw.ca/the.trainman/Pan-shot/pan-s.jpg)
http://members.shaw.ca/the.trainman/Pan-shot/Pan-shot.html (http://members.shaw.ca/the.trainman/Pan-shot/Pan-shot.html)
OK, some more thoughts on layout planning.
Many years ago, in the days of layouts that resembled bowels of spaghetti, people like John Armstrong and Paul Mallery brought order to the universe with the books and articles they wrote. The ideas and methods they put forth laid the groundwork for the current crop of operation oriented layout concepts commonly in use. To them we are eternally grateful.
However, as we progress in to this next generation of layout design, some of the tenants they put forth have become less important.
Example:
When most layouts had scenic depths of 4 or 5 feet, or even more, it was considered important to avoid placing track work parallel to the bench work edge. But after viewing hundreds of “shelf†layouts with scenic depths in the 1’ to 3’ range, I have abandoned any concern for this “ruleâ€.
Related to that is the idea of free form bench work as apposed to bench work with simple straight edges. In the hay day of L girder layout construction, one of the advantages touted was this ability to curve the layout edge. Again, this is a nice feature on layouts with large scenic depths, but becomes completely unimportant in the now popular 1’ to 3’ shelf concepts.
Both these ideas where touted as making the layout more natural looking and less toy like.
In my own layout planning I have completely abandoned any concern for these two “rulesâ€. I now make bench work simple rectangles and triangles and often put track parallel to the layout edge on purpose to maximize space usage. No one seems to notice or comment that it looks toy like or unnatural.
Portability,
For many years it was assumed that the best layouts had to be permanent structures with little hope of ever moving them. The modular guys have proven that wrong with the great modeling they do. And while we need not restrict our selves to their rigid requirements, we can build layouts to allow for easy modular disassembly and reassembly with just a small amount of planning and a little more construction finesse. In fact, these new walk around, shallow scene layouts lend themselves to this very well. Personally I have taken a vow to never build another layout that will have to be demolished to get out of the building.
I was very hard headed in learning this one. I have built 5 layouts and only “completed†two. No more layout construction effort or money will be “sacrificedâ€.
Staging, I was ahead of the curve on this one. My first layout, built by my father in 1966, had hidden staging behind the mountain at the rear. Each of the two spaghetti bowl loops that made their way around the two 5x9 platforms, had a hidden passing siding to allow one train to enter the tunnel and a different one to reappear. And it was even semi automatic in operation. The track gaps where arranged so that a train traveling at any reasonable speed would stop before fouling the other route when the turnout was set against it. So you just set the turnout at one end for the empty track, the train pulled in and stopped, you flipped a toggle and set the turnout back and the other train was on its way.
So as to not make these posts any longer then they are already, I will stop here and welcome your comments. I will post some more ideas on this topic when my fingers have rested a bit.
Again, thanks to all for sharing your layout concepts and thoughts.
Sheldon
Sheldon wrote in part: "Personally I have taken a vow to never build another layout that will have to be demolished to get out of the building."
I sure agree with that now that it's too late for me to build my layout that way :D One of my sons, an excellent carpenter who builds what I consider to be lovely furniture as his 'pastime', built beautiful, sturdy storage cabinets for my dear wife to store 'grand kids' toys, etc in. I built half of my current layout on top of these cabinets. The cabinets are permanent, so I guess that means that we won't be moving to another house unless the whole layout is torn down.
Sheldon's comments about 'portability' are well worth considering for anyone who is planning to build a layout.
lanny nicolet
This thread has elements of previous threads about, "8 x 4" etc.
Railways in practice seldom if ever go around in circles; they go from A to B. Taking a slice out of life to model has this problem when "playing trains."
All my layouts have been from end-to-end, even the Club layout, over 40 feet, was an end to end model of an end-to-end line long since gone, BUT the layout was subsequently adopted by the local museum as of local historical interest. The BBC did a ½hr program on it.
Consequently all my efforts have been modular in design, for easy transport and storage. A practice adopted for transport and storage was to double-deck similar size boards, face to face, with masonite sides. This was been found to save on damage.
Locating pins are not relied upon. In place of large washers when bolting tables together, it is better to laminate predrilled 1/8" x 1½" steel strips cut to at least 2/3 of the join, and to be able to bolt these together to make the joint rigid when the alignment is o'k.
Stewart,
I agree, but railroads, even small ones, in this country anyway, usually go more than just a few miles. So to simulate any reasonable level of traffic, and keep a balance of "over the line" running and "terminal operations", continuous loops, that are partly hidden with staging areas are the logical answer.
Point to point modeling is only effective for the smallest prototypes. A survey of the interests of the modelers on this board or of modelers across this country would quickly reveal that many, if not a clear majority are interested in the operations of larger prototype systems.
Even to model the tiny Ma & Pa that ran past my home, in a pure point to point, mile for mile form would take more than the 880 square feet I have. even if you used two or more levels. And operating it would be very boring to many since they only ran 2-3 trains in a 24 hr period over their 30 some miles of track.
On this note, the next thing I was planning to write about is the concept of only modeling any given element of the railroad one time. Only one freight yard (in the middle of the run rather than two, one at each end), only one engine terminal, one large passenger terminal, one small passenger terminal, etc, etc, etc,. That way you have more space for different elements and all destinations and originations of the trains are "off stage".
Modeling the activity of one division point on a major US railroad is a modeling acomplishment to be proud of, trying to model two is well beyond the time and resources of many if not most.
Stewart,
Nothing here is ment to disparage other approaches, but is simply intended to put forth information about how others have effectively modeled a small piece of a very large rail system. If that does not interest you, fine.
Thank you for the thoughts on your module construction. Personally, my goal is not to be able to move the railroad for temperary display, but rather to simply be able to move it to a new home if necessary.
As for any previous thread, I most likely did not read them, and no similarity is intended.
Sheldon
Quote from: atlanticcentral on April 03, 2007, 11:36:23 PM
I have designed a number of layouts for fellow modelers and am working on another right now.
I am interested in knowing the following about anyones layout.
Who has multi decks?
How high is each deck?
How deep are your scenes?
Do you use a helix or work your way up/down the room?
Do you use staging?
Is your staging hidden or visable?
Is your mainline single or double track?
Do you model a prototype or freelance?
Do you model a specific era?
Is your layout continuous or point to point?
How big (square feet) is you layout room/space?
Feel free to answer as many or as few of these questions as interest you.
Thanks
Sheldon
That sounds like the heliton central before we built it.
A few other thoughts:
Rail fan vs. Engineer - Some only want to be the engineer, so their layouts are designed from that perspective only. I like both, some days I want to be the Engineer, other days I just want to stand by and watch trains. So my approach to layout planning does everything posible to include both schemes of operation, preferably at the same time.
Timetable, train orders, fast clocks - I like all these as well. They require interested crews and a layout plan with all the necessary options or things get slow, boring, bogged down.
Action - I like it, 4,5 or even more trains going at once, East, West, switching, passenger, freight just like any busy spot on any North American Class I system. A station agent schedule from Harrisburg, PA on the PRR in the 1930's shows that a train of one sort or another went through there about every 5 min., 24 hours a day. I like the idea of simulating that.
Well, thats enough for now, more later.
Sheldon
Sheldon,
As I have read through this thread, I am curious if you are in the 'planning stages' for your own layout ... or developing concepts to use when helping othes design layouts?
I probably have missed your comments, etc. so accept my apologies if so, but I was under the impression that you have a finished, operating layout? If so, though I may have missed it in another thread, could you share the size, etc. of your layout?
thanks,
lanny nicolet
Lanny,
My current layout was about 50% complete when my wife and I made a decission that we will be moving in 2-3 years. That layout is/was permanetly constructed in a 22x40 room above my 6 car garage ( I don't have six cars, but the garage could hold that many if it had to).
Rather than invest any more time/money/effort into that layout, I have redesigned it into modules that will allow 90% of it to be moved when we move.
Both layouts are similar, but the modular one is simipler in a few ways and actually represents some improvements based on things learned from the previous one. The modular one will also allow construction in phases so I may reach a point of having a smaller but operational layout before I move.
The old layout was very complex to allow the greatest number of features and the longest possible mainline in the available space. Its complexity did not allow for the modular construction. Most of the complexity has been eliminated for several reasons in addition to the need for move-ability.
Both layout concepts are the same - double track mainline, one major city with freight yard, passenger terminal, engine terminal, industries; a long mainline run with other industries and scenic features. They include a water front scene w/tracks in the streets, a coal mine, and lots of long scenic stretches that allow good rail fan viewing of prototypical, or nearly prototypical length trains.
So, while I am at this, here are few more planning thoughts:
If we take a close look at the rail served industies in any major North American city, we find that few are along the main line or served from sidings comming directly off the main line. In fact, major railroads avoid industrial sidings on te main line and often install passing sidings specificly to then branch off to industrail spurs when industries are along the main line.
Most large cities have secondary trackage or belt lines, sometimes owned by an independent line or jointly owned by several railroads to serve industrial areas. These belt lines channel traffic to major yards where it is then made up into over the road trains.
My layout is planned this way. Very few industries are directly on the main line but rather are in seperate indutrial areas. Operationally this has the same advantage as on the prototype. The switching of industries does not interfere with the movement of mainline trains. It creates more jobs for more operators at the same time and is more like real railroads of the size I am trying to model.
Next time I'll talk about train lengths.
Sheldon
Thanks Sheldon.
I am enjoying reading your layout planning ideas and even your current 'non permanent' layout sounds great.
Looking forward to reading more of your layout ideas and thoughts.
lanny nicolet
I am in the design stage for a new layout right now, myself. Pretty much settled on a total footprint of approximately 22' x 11', one level, hollow square, double track main, a peninsula, scene depth 15" to 24", some hidden staging, reversing loop, probably a small yard. This will be the second biggest one ever as things stand now.
The plan is DC, but I may yet parallel wire for NCE PowerCab DCC for sound effects (playable whistle). I will run a lot of two trains continuous loop, but switch off trains, directions, and loops. I may play in a yard a little, but I found I designed for it before and then didn't do it.
Still working on trying to have one 'diorama' of a section of the New River with N&W on one bank and VGN on the other.
Although I follow the prototypes to a large extent, I do not try to model any specific segment of the actual mainlines, rather I try for the flavor of the rural Tidewater area, and the rural mountains, other than my desire for the one river scene noted above.
Dear Sheldon and "Virg,"
Very impressive, to me, your knowledge. Thanks a million for your posts over the years.
I have been in the planning stages for a few years and am finally taking the plunge. I have been promised an 11' x 22' HO layout based on the Erie Lackawanna from a friend who has gotten out of the hobby. Just have to hack it apart and reassemble it. I hope to do something similar to what "Virg" is doing, i.e. putting a peninsula in there somewhere. It will be rewired for DCC. I have yet to decide which mfr to use for the DCC.
Will keep you informed, if you would like. Looks like the end summer is when the transfer will occur. I can send pix via e-mail if you would like.
Best, Jack
Jack,
As I have said before, I do not use DCC. But based on those I know who do, and on myown research a few years ago, I would recommend Digitrax or Easy DCC. They both seem to be the most versatal, expandable and feature packed systems out there.
But again, if you are not sold on DCC for specific reasons like sound, understand that there are lots of options and lots of ways to "apply" DC other than the popular cab control.
Sheldon
Dear Sheldon,
I did remember that you do not use DCC. Thanks for the info. Several others on this site have mentioned Easy DCC, too. Looks like a leading candidate.
Best Wishes,
Jack
OK, consider for a moment the small-time railroad. My Maryland Central operates, as George Hilton has described the Ma & Pa, in “genteel poverty.†It is, in imaginary antimatter, to the south side of Baltimore, what the Ma & Pa was in real life on the north side.
I have no idea how old the layout is. I started it with number two son, perhaps 12 to 15 years ago. It’s not finished yet. I still see a hundred or more projects. They are only accomplished as the spirit moves me. A couple years ago, I finally finished a scratch-built structure I began in the early ‘60s. Some things just take time.
My Maryland Central is modeled on a piece of 4’ x 5’ ft plywood. The mainline is a circle of track â€" as disguised as one can make it in that space â€" barely 2/10 of a mile around. Physically, besides the loop, it consists of one siding, a three-stub yard, a switchback and an interchange track.
Operationally, the spreadsheet-generated, random card order system can make running local freights about as challenging as life ought to be for one person.
On the other hand, there is an unparalleled advantage to a circle of track â€" no pun intended. After a hard day in the mines, you can kick back with a cup of tea and watch an old 4-6-0 kettle turn laps with a combine and a coach at a scale 10 mph. There are some classic bluegrass train songs playing in the background, and the cat is asleep on a nearby bench. It doesn’t get any better than that.
Bob
Bob,
And that is the great thing about this hobby, it can be as much or as little as you want and still be very interesting and rewarding.
Now a few thoughts on train length;
Prototype train lengths vary quite a bit with era, type of railroad, locale, product being carried, grades, local laws, etc.
Maybe one of the most attractive things about the transition era is that in addition to having both steam and diesel, it was an era of moderate length trains for the most part. These train lengths are long enough to be challenging and interesting to model without overwelming our selectively compressed layouts.
Typical commodity freight trains where usually about 2200 feet long, or about 1/2 mile. With most freight cars of that era being 40' to 50', that means 40 to 50 cars. Some railroads and some states actually had regulation/laws that limited freight trains to numbers like 70 cars max.
50 cars is a BIG train on a model railroad, even a big model railroad, but not EVERY train would be the maximum and 25 to 30 cars looks really big on a big layout and gives that prototype feel and is believeable based on what we know about the prototype.
That 2200 feet figure, that was a typical passing siding length in that era, obvoiusly a controling factor.
Railroads did run longer trains for some things, coal drags, etc, but, hoppers where generally shorter, and are very light when empty, so from a tonnage standpoint it made sense to try to take as many empties back to the coal fields at one time as was possible. 100 hoppers at 34' = 3400', still not even 3/4 of a mile.
It should also be noted that longer trains, 70 to 100 cars, would move at considerably slower speeds for safety and breaking reasons. And, conversly, faster trains would be shorter for the same reasons. So that reefer special may only be 30 cars so it can race along and stop and start more quickly.
One more note, most of these specific numbers apply more to the east and central portions of the counrty, out west, the wide open spaces did allow longer trains, longer sidings, etc. But only to a point. Airizona was actually one of the states that limited trains to 70 cars. So while western trains would be somewhat longer on average, the same general situaton does apply.
One last word on freight train length, these lengths would have been typical from just after the turn of the century into the late 50's and early 60's. After that full dieselation and better communication quickly advanced train lenghts.
Passenger trains in the hey day of rail passenger travel could be seen in every length from a one car local to 18 or more cars. In the east many name trains held their length to the 9 to 15 car range for speed considerations, even after diesels took over.
As modelers we have a lot more flexability here unless we are set on modeling the 1938 20th Century Limited car for car. One car pulled by an E8 is as prototypical as 12 cars being pulled by 2 E8's
What would typical passenger locos handle? Here's a short list.
A PRR K4 was good for about 18 heavyweights on generally level track, a few less as the grades picked up.
Two PA1's or E8's will handle allmost anything you put behind them, 18-20 or more cars, heavyweight or lightweight, would be no problem except on the worst grades.
A USRA light Pacific would be good for about 12-14 cars on the flat. The B&O used their USRA light clones in the mountains pulling locals that where typically 3-5 heavyweights.
The Santa Fe and Northern Pacific prefered sets of 4 passenger equiped F7's for their 15-20 car consists through the mountains.
The B&O and the C&O prefered 4-8-2's to take their longer trains through their mountain regions, 12-15 cars on average.
And a PRR E6 Atlantic could easily handle what a USRA light Pacific was needed for on other roads, or about 12-14 cars on the flat.
So when planning a layout, you should think about you space, the kind of railroading you want to model, how long you would like your trains to be, etc.
If you do have an interest in big time railroading, one big advantage to double track is it helps disguise the shortness of our model mianlines and makes longer trains more practical to run.
Maybe more latter, but this covers most of what was on my mind. Questions and comments are welcome.
Sheldon
“The longest train I ever saw
Went down that Georgia Line
The engine passed at six o'clock
The cab went by at nine.â€
- a verse to “In the Pinesâ€
I have seen some pretty impressive model train lengths on modular displays in recent years. It kind of reminds me of those old Volkswagen cramming escapades we used to see years ago. It’s fun to watch, but realistically, I think most modelers are limited. A scale mile of HO track is just under 61 feet. This probably qualifies as a mid-size home layout.
The question is, how long a train do you run on it? There is another dimension to scale here, I’m not thinking about O, HO or N, but rather how much of the train you model. Let’s call it train scale as opposed to model scale. To a great extent, they are inversely proportional. On my 20-sq ft layout, a coal drag consists of five hoppers; locals seldom reach this length; and passengers are generally just a combine and a coach.
The point here is that, just as it is not necessary to think of a layout being limited by a mere scale mile or two of track, you don’t have to think about your train being just a few cars long. In the way freight example, I like to focus on the most efficient pick up a delivery of a carload â€" picking it up at an interchange point, bringing it back to the yards when necessary, getting it made up in the next available train out, and switching it in the fewest moves. In short, it becomes a game, much like John Allen’s Timesaver. While the size of the train may be limited by the size of your layout, you never really think about it that way.
Regards,
Bob
Bob,
Again I agree and small layouts require small trains. But you may be surprised at the number of modelers with basement sized empires with miles of track. My layout fills a 22x40 foot room, will have about 8 scale miles of double track mainline and is only average in size among our local group and other area modelers I know.
And I do selectively compress my trains. 18' is my basic train length unit. Or about 1500' vs the 2200' I discussed above. About 30 40' cars on average. And as I explained, big class one railroads, then and now, avoided switching sidings right from the mainline, especailly in urban areas. My locals are 15 cars or so and spend little time on the main, and most time in the industrial area.
There are all sorts of approaches to all sorts of modeling. My comments have been about effective ways to capture the immensity of the prototype. Some people are not interested in this, thats fine. Some prefer the human scale of small little lines like the Ma & Pa, that's fine too. The Ma & Pa once ran right behind the house I now live in. Its an interesting line with a great history. But it is not what I am interested in modeling. So for those interested in big time railroading, I have shared my ideas and knowledge.
Sheldon
Sheldon,
I'd have given up my birthright to the kingdoms of Castile and Aragon to have lived along the Ma & Pa during its day. Sounds like it was already gone by the time you got there. When Bachmann came out with No. 27, I knew I had to have one - then, 4, 5, and 6 - my allowance for the next five years, but I live along the line vicariously with these models.
Regards,
Bob
Bob,
Yes it was gone, but I live in a 106 year old Queen Anne that watched it all. From the conversion to standard guage to the last run. I live right in the old village of Forest Hill. The station still stands a half a block away and is a model train store. Just a short drive up the road to Rocks State Park you can see the remains of the bridge over the creek, and right here in the village, you can still see the cut where the track headed north out of the village.
And, as a child in Anne Arundel County, I did personally watch the last few trains of the Batltimore and Annapolis make their way up and down that little line. And I even road their last attempt at passenger service, 2 RDC's leased from the B&O.
Sheldon