Comments on my layout designs please

How do you plan to control the trains?

Personally i think A is a good design. The 21" walkway is decent (compared to 19 and 18") and it could be operated as a point to point given the yards at the return loops.  The overall flow of A would be visually more appealing not from just as a viewer but also as an operator than option B once built. I would go with a pop up access in the upper right corner tho. 

  I like plan B .  Easy access.

I'm planning on DCS, Legacy, and conventional.  

A no brainier, the best of the two is Plan A with lots of operation, reversing loops, small TT area and easy access to layout without ducking under or removing track sections.

Plan B has too much dead area with storage on whisker tracks around the TT, boring loops around the room and inconvenient duck under or track removal for access.

Charlie

I like the around the room layout in B.  I think you need to provide some details on how you want to operate the layout.

For me, I tend to just let them run, I don't try much switching, etc.  So, you could have an upper line and a lower line (or two), and no need to connect them.  Having an elevated line would allow for bridges, and tunnels, etc. 

You have a big area to store engines,  so that would be a roundhouse,  but are you interested in a passenger station? 

Just some things to think about. 

Keep us posted. 

Plan A. I like the flow and accessibility.

I'm torn, but leaning slightly toward A.   Very interested in what the more experienced guys think.

I like plan B.

Trust me.  Do not use Scaletrax.  I made the same decision you are making.  Financial.  You will be struggling with weak connections, warping and switches that are hit and miss.

Search for my name and Scaletrax and you will see all the posts and pictures of my issues.

It looks great.  Until you start running trains.

Ron

Plan B almost requires remote operation, due to the center peninsula. Plan A could be operated from a central control panel in the opening near the turntable. With B, even with remote operation, you are going to be either walking around the peninsula to see the trains, or ducking under the lead to the turntable.

The one advantage of B is that it is a one "blob" layout versus A, which is a two "blob" layout. John Armstrong, the hobby's best ever track planner, said, minimize blobs, and if you have to have a blob, make it do double duty.

So another approach would be to start with the benchwork shape of B, but stack the turnback curves of A's dog bone in the blob. That way, you can walk around the peninsula and back to follow the train on its whole path.  Since turn back curves are fake, put the turntable as the top level over the two turn back curves. This plan would work best with remote control, since it is walkaround.

Please let me know if this isn't clear.

Both look like you are heavy into locomotives, big steamers at that.  With as much room as you have, you could use some engine escapes in your yards, and maybe a through track.  This would make yard work a bit easier, unless their only purpose is car storage.  I would think if the focus is on big steam, providing room for engine service in the turntable area, ash dump, coaling, water, etc, without going to a dead end track, would be needed.  Sometimes reducing some trackage to gain more realism with something to do other than let her rip on the mains pays off in the long run.  Plan B to me looks like it has more room and potential to add operational details.  Your under table trackage could be assumed to be where your trains are going to and coming from, but an interchange track, maybe an small industry somewhere off you visible main would help too.  The narrow passage way is only an issue if you have more than one engineer that might have to navigate the narrow area at the same time.  The duck under in Plan B might be an issue for some visitors, but also could be an opportunity to build a nice double track Bascule bridge.

Both layouts need a yard lead so as to not foul the mainline track.

Jan

I don't think that you will be satisfied with either plan because the aisles are too narrow.  Turntables and reverse loops eat a lot of space.  I suggest that you lay out the edges of the benchwork for both plans on the floor using painter's masking tape.  Put chairs or boxes where the aisles are narrow and see if you really can live with squeezing through the openings.  Invite your friends over and see if they can squeeze through.  The biggest mistake many of us make is trying to get too much track in a given space.  

I think that you will be better off with an around the room plan using a lift bridge to enter the center of the layout as shown in plan B.  Take out the center peninsula or reduce its size by half.  In my experience, layouts really get old and unenjoyable when you and your friends are uncomfortable in the layout room.  Many times in layout planning, less is more.  NH Joe

Hey Don, how about using all that extra space in the next room to help you out?   You could punch through a small tunnel and put your roundhouse on the other side fixing the reach issue!   LOL   (he says as he stirs the pot)

@Jan posted:

Both layouts need a yard lead so as to not foul the mainline track.

Jan

Yessir!

Watch this video, then give some thought to how you can add this. It will make a HUGE difference in your operational enjoyment.

I think 'A' is better.  But how steep are the grades in that upper lobe?  Also, the pink / purple mainline track that leads into the industry or yard in the upper left-hand part of the drawing... as far as I'm concerned the mainline should be level or almost level for at least as long as the longest industry track.

Bottom line, I like the idea of 'A', no duck-under and the industry gives the train on the outer main "something to do."  But because of the grades, I think operations would be challenging if you built it as currently drawn.  My $.02.

@42trainman posted:

Hey Don, how about using all that extra space in the next room to help you out?   You could punch through a small tunnel and put your roundhouse on the other side fixing the reach issue!   LOL   (he says as he stirs the pot)

You're killin' me smalls!  You don't know how difficult it was to gain even 3 extra feet in that train room when we built the house!

But a tunnel and return loop around the future wet bar in that adjacent room sure would be nice.

There is an interesting video out there showing the happy removal of a powered duck under bridge. The owner got tired of people having to stand outside it and just look at the interior trackage and buildings. I can see that happening on plan B. Just a comment in the FWIW category.

Train ON!