Harpers Ferry multi-room layout remodel

I can see what you mean when you say the trains and layout are not really easily viewed.  The closet popup would not make me happy.  Having to go into another room, staging area, is awkward also.  On the other hand, bathroom guests should enjoy a train running through now and then.....LOL.  

I think your new design is an improvement.  I like to think long term however, so how accessible will the water heater and furnace be ?   Water heaters are ten year items.  How old is yours.  If I may suggest getting a tankless water heater, you will not only save big time on hot water bills, but it will free up space.  Do you have natural gas as a fuel source ?   They may also run on propane.  Not sure about electric versions.   If you like the idea of a tankless water heater, Rannai is the brand I would suggest.  The initial outlay may seem steep, but you won't regret it in the long term.

Our water heater is 13 yo.   I plan to replace it before any new layout construction.   Plus I'm going to add a full size door for access to furnace/water heater.   Considering a tankless but greater costs of unit and installation roi is 7-10 years.  We have natural gas.  

I'm helping WW build his South Fork layout with Atlas O and I really like the track.  The O54-O72 curved switches really made my new plan work.

The closet pop up was fun for me or the kids when I was in my 40's but now that boys are adults and I'm older, duck unders aren't fun anymore.

Obsidian,

Well, you are definitely working the Givens and Druthers. I would go with the higher track to scenery ratio in your case. You've expressed some boredom of the loop running, although I did see that you could switch to the inner line and reverse direction on the current layout.

 I like the balloon around the yard. You kept the reversing and added operational elements.

Some careful placement of trees, vegetation and a few buildings can still have a positive visual impact. The backdrops are big plus.

The one room is a good deal. Primer the block and paint the walls before you build.

The one negative that I see is furnace maintenance. Perhaps you can make the area of the layout that would possibly block replacing the furnace sectional for possible removal. You will have to be creative, since the RH/TT will be located there. 2 or 3 small modules bolted together. All will be fine until you build, then Murphy will visit and cause some furnace havoc.

The list of Cons is short and not prohibitive. Less (space) is more (railroad) in this case. You have added more operational features.

Obsidian,

Three comments (in order of importance) about the actual design:

1.  If your layout is actually wall-to-wall as it appears, you've got a long reach to the yard switches for derailments / switch machine repair, and an even longer reach to upper right where a grade starts, with no room for a hatch;

2.  Your yard lead seems way too short and will cause you to foul the mainline way too frequently; and,

3.  Location of turntable provides no room for steam engine servicing facilities.

Only my opinion, but #1 is the only deal breaker.

Chuck

For the new plan, I was also wondering about service access for the furnace and water heater. When my parents house was sold it still has the original gas furnace and gas water heater still working fine at 41 years old. But you can't always count on that. Huge hassle if you have to chop the layout on short notice to service or replace a major item.

Otherwise a fine plan. My preference would be to have long layover tracks for additional trains, probably on a lower level, probably hidden if there isn't space to fit in a larger double-ended visible yard.

Yard leads aren't that important for model railroads of this size IMO. Space and maintaining mainline radii inhibit a longer lead.

How high is the new layout plan? I like to multi-task my space. A higher layout can have work benches and storage underneath.

First of all I wish I had your space. Second, I had a multi room layout, it just did not work to my satisfaction.  Following the train to the hole accessing the next room was fine but the operator then had to race back to the door to get to the next room.  If there was a derailment it could not be seen leaving a potential short in place for far too long.  I scaled back to a single room.  The access hole remained but as a means to get to the work bench and what has become a 3 track staging yard.  I would go for the single room version if that option is available.

Thanks for the replies.

1. The reach to the farthest switch is as far as the yard on my current layout.   I've used a reach tool to grab derailed cars for years:  http://www.tgldirect.com/produ...ber-30/032100430001/    In 12 years of operating my layout I can count on one hand the # of times I've had to climb on layout to retrieve a derailed engine.  Knock on wood, I've had no trouble with my wired remote switches.   So I'll accept the rare inconvenience in exchange for a longer mainline.

2.  Agreed.  I used the RR-Track simulator and found that if I build the consist onto the reverse loop that the main will occasionally be fowled when building large consists from the yard.  This is a pro and con in that my current layout has no lead at all.  I'm looking forward to managing/scheduling the yard switcher to avoid the train on the fouled mainline.

3.  I'll try re-positioning the turntable so I can fit my coaling tower and water column on the turntable lead. 

Carl,

I plan to add a full size doorway in front of the furnace/water heater for servicing before layout is built.  Check out some of my layout videos and you'll see I run a train on the inner loop that reverses direction on each pass.   So I'm glad to retain a reverse feature in new plan but now on a separate 'balloon' around yard.

Necrails, exactly, thank you.   I've forgotten about trains hidden on mainline in other room and had collisions that resulted in a car toppling to cement floor.   Needless to say that damaged car became yet another future 'project' to fix.   I've tried monitoring train activity in the storage and popup rooms using and old iphone and my ipad connected via facetime while operating.   It's still not a optimal as entering train room, assessing whats on track in a glance, and commencing operations.   

Ace, good idea to add a line that drops below to a lower storage yard.    I was planning on about 40" main level height.   Current layout is 36".  The higher the table the shorter my reach gets.

OBSIDIAN,

   I really like the looks of the layout, I recommend leaving more space to access your furnace for repairs.  The new instant hot water heaters are great stuff, the initial outlay in some areas for installation & purchase is very expensive however.  With the cost of Natural Gas being so low, and will probably go even lower in the next few years, I opted to stay with the Conventional Instant Recovery Gas Hot Water Heaters and installed them myself.  

PCRR/Dave

Obsidian posted:

I was planning on about 40" main level height.   Current layout is 36".

Do you regret using the 36" for your current layout? I'm planning on 34" because I want a loop2loop display layout above it at 48".

Dave, no.   Some of the smaller tables I built for existing layout are on 36" 2x2 balusters i got from depot.   They come pre-cut to 36" so they were easy to use.  36" was also easier to climb up onto when I was adding backdrops/laying track.

Hmmm, not much love for the old Harpers Ferry layout.   Perhaps we all just love to see new layouts designed and built.   If I do go forward with the new plan I'll chronicle progress on a thread here on OGR.

Thanks for the quick reply.

Obsidian posted:

Hmmm, not much love for the old Harpers Ferry layout.   Perhaps we all just love to see new layouts designed and built.   If I do go forward with the new plan I'll chronicle progress on a thread here on OGR.

Well, guys, here's what he's giving up.  Very nice, Obsidian.

After watching this, I am sure you'll build a really nice one again.

WOW what a great layout!

mike g. posted:

WOW what a great layout!

Thanks for the compliment.   Honestly I'm torn.   I like the idea that I've somewhat recreated my favorite local rail fanning location in Harpers Ferry.  Perhaps I should push forward and add the Potomac river bed which (using acrylic Aquatex glass for water) would greatly enhance the layout appearance.   Some fascia board and skirts hiding the rats nest below bench work would help the room as well.

Then there is my plan on the drafting board to expand this layout and completely takeover the storage room: 

This would solve some of my rail yard needs and be a home for my MTH WM Scenic Railroad  #734 2-8-0 and passenger cars.  I've ridden this steam excursion train and would be fun to model the Frostburg station in O.  New layout would stretch mainline well over 200' and allow room to comfortably operate 3-4 trains concurrently.

 I don't think you should get rid of the Harper's Ferry scenes.  The backdrops you now have look 'really' good representing an historic area that is my favorite to visit to watch trains.  Make the changes you mentioned(river bed etc) & keep Harper's Ferry.  I like the Frostburg Room concept as an addition, but only if you will have access to your appliances for maintenance and/or replacement whenever that time comes.  Good luck on your decision.  

Hey there, I don't think you should get rid of it either, But I am all for your expanding the way your talking. I bet it will be as grand as the rest of your layout! Either way I can't wait to see how things turn out.

Here's a thought, albeit radical.  Would moving the bathroom be an alternative ?

Dan yes, moving the bath would be best case scenario but would cost a lot of future trains (and college tuition).  The path of least resistance at this point is to turn storage room into Frostburg room.

https://ogrforum.com/t...e-bath-for-expansion

So I've decided to stick with my multi-room Harpers Ferry layout.   I redesigned the track plan to eliminate the restrictive O-42 curves on the inner loop.   Those O-42 curves prevented my collection of min O-54 MTH Premier steamers from negotiating the reverse loop around engine yard.  That meant that I had to fowl the outer loop in order to dispatch large (4-8-4 and articulated) steamers.   Also, I've started to replace my Railking passenger sets with Premier 70'.  Though 70' will negotiate O-42 curves they look awkward when doing so.   This min O-54 track plan required a major remodel of my layout.   I've had to expand benchwork into the central walkway a half a foot.   But I still have 30" at the narrowest point.   Biggest change was that the Harpers Ferry town hill had to move a few inches to accommodate the track to the south.   I was able to save almost all of the rock faces I had created.  I also eliminated the tunnel under the hill so my sight line into the closet room will be greatly improved.  Next I'll finally put a river bed under the Potomac River bridges.   Considering how much time and effort is going into this remodel I'm glad I chose not to build another layout in a smaller room.  Here is a video update.   Please excuse the renovation mess.

I don't have to tell you that you were successful with the redesign for the remodel.  The trains look good moving around.

I am curious about the traction tire pile. A changing session or they throwin'  'em left and right?

Your redesign efforts appear to be paying off.  Trains �� look good running on the larger curves.

Thanks for the positive comments.  I'm happy with the revised track plan.  Since I chose to model a real location (see video below), the broader curves do look a bit more realistic.  I can now run just about any engine/consist I own on the inner or outer loops.   Although the articulated engines I have are min O-72 I've found they will successfully negotiate O-54 (see my N&W Holy Trinity video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...STA4P0XOw&t=375s .   They do overhang and so I won't run them on the inner loop.   Before the redesign my articulated steamers would scrape the walls.  That's why some of the backdrops are missing (due to damage).   I plan to reprint and mount the backdrops since the redesigned layout has more space between track and walls.

Its worth noting that the advice of this forum to layout builders to 'use the largest curves you can fit' should be heeded.  My original curve size frame of reference was based upon the O-31 curves that came with MTH starter sets and Railking sub scale trains.   As I matured in the hobby and eventually traded up my collection to Premier and Scale Railking, once 'big' O-42 and O-54 curves were not big enough.   Truth be told O-72 really doesn't do scale O gauge trains justice.  But for some like me there is a practical limit to how much space one can dedicate to my hobby.   I'm lucky to have the room I have and to have a wife that hasn't killed me yet for the 'holes' I put into walls to expand into other rooms:-) .  Now that it runs well I just need to make the layout I have more presentable. 

Ken,

Your rebuild is going great!  I do like the Harper's Ferry plan and really like the real Harper's Ferry.  Thank you for the videos!  I see you chose to stick with RealTrax and not go with Atlas as you were thinking of last year.  I too am space constrained, and have to make a lot of compromises in my new planned layout.  I am looking forward to seeing what you do with the Frostburg Room.  Frostburg and the Western Maryland Scenic in general are great places.  The photo backdrop is great!  I'll look forward to seeing the new copy with the scenery built up to it.  Thank you for posting.  I'm sorry I didn't get into the discussion last year.  I don't know how I missed it, but I'm glad I found the topic now!

Looks GOOD! Nice video.

Great work. It's amazing what imagination and talent can produce. I'm curious though, in your first video, did you improvise the coupler on the pilot of the second engine of the steam doubleheader?

That was a great video!!

So I've been operating my revised min O-54 layout now for about a year.  The issues (trains on mainline disappearing from view, no turntable, need longer loop, Realtrax,  no branch line long enough to park a train, incomplete scenery) still remain.  I'm unable to commit to completing scenery because I'm unsatisfied with the existing train room and layout.   

So... I've decided to move a wall.   When I move the wall that separates the train room from the rest of the basement 4' I'll be able to fit my larger and more interesting plan in one room.   See 3D below:

Moving the wall allows me to re-position the door to the lower right corner.   The layout will get rotated 90 degrees in the current room.   That makes room for a twisted dogbone loop and turntable in the lower left corner.   At one point I considered moving the adjacent bath but I ruled that out due to the high expense.   I figure moving the wall wont cost more than about a grand with help from my contractor friend.   I'll be able to re-use most of my existing bench work and scenery.  Plus I will switch from Realtrax to Atlas O (more turnout and curve variety).    We were already planning to turn the storage room next to the HVAC  (mentioned earlier in this thread) into a bar.   When that work is being done I'll get the train room wall moved too.  Until then I'll live with my layout as is.  

Existing layout: 160' mainline, Realtrax, one level, 30% hidden. 24x12'

Revised layout: 176' mainline, Atlas O, grade separated crossing, one 17x14' room + turntable.

- 

Hey, I like your new plan a lot!!!!  That is a great decision, and to do it at about $1000!!  Excellent!  Moving to Atlas O track will be a big improvement as well!   I'm looking forward to seeing this even more now!!! 

When (not if, stay positive) I do this it will be the 3rd time I've 'repositioned' my layout since starting it 15 years ago.   Back then I ran MTH Rugged-Rails on O-31 curves.   Now I run scale Premier exclusively.   Scale is longer, bigger.   I'm lucky that the articulated engines I have will negotiate O-54 (which BTW is the minimum curve for some scale freight like my new twin stack containers).   This plan with Atlas O allowed me to stretch some curves from O82 to 108.   While I don't have the space of some of my clients larger layouts I've learned that O scale rolling stock looks better on bigger curves.   I think this plan is a good compromise of tight and broad curves while modeling a real location in a the space of a large bedroom.   My first layout was a figure-eight and I've always enjoyed the up and over then under action.   Command control trains make this track configuration even better with speed control.  Max grade will be 3.5% which most of my engines can handle with a 20 car consists.