If you had to start over...

I always thought it might be fun to build the island of Sodor.

Run all Thomas stuff and have a lot of interactive accessories.

Of course it would be open to the public.

Has anyone already done this ?

I don't remember a time when I didn't have trains. My first set was purchased the day I was born. Now my grandkids love to run them with me. I have already done the out building thing and love it although I wouldn't mind a larger one. There have been some wonderful people come into my life because of my trains and I wouldn 't ever change a thing.  I've always said that if I had a warehouse, there would be one corner where if I only had a couple more inches.....

     Ed

If I was starting over in O gauge, and IF I had a house with a finished basement (which I don't), I definitely would use that space for my layout.

I also would keep it to a modest size, rather than try to fill every square inch of available space, and I definitely would give as much attention to detail as I possibly could in terms of scenery and settings.

I agree with the observation quoted above.  Less definitely can be more, and that's a lesson many learn far too late.

You have selected a prototype and an era you're interested in, and have already developed an equipment roster that you like, so this is definitely the time to start on that layout.  Keep in mind that it's almost always far easier to expand a small or modest size layout than it is to go back and rework a large one.

First let me say, what a GREAT question.

My first answer is maybe, perhaps, I don't know - S gauge?

Definitely I would avoid the 0-27 car purchases I made. Everything would be as "scale" as I could get it. My starter sets were a good beginning but some of the rolling stock I did not like.

I would plan out my pike a little more carefully. In this I would wait until I had more track, switches, and power, instead of putting something up immediately just to see it run and then add on to it as I did.

I love Fastrack, I really do, but I might consider something more realistic. And I would do more to deaden the sound regardless of the track I choose.

I would paint the interior walls of the layout room (to match the scenery) completely before I started construction. I would try to avoid the use of the church tables I bought - though $10 apiece was a good price.

My minimum curves would expand because I would have more room. More money would be, at least initially, spent on infrastructure as opposed to rolling stock.

Must include the reversing loop I don't have and a decent switch yard. I have often thought that a cool looking and complicated switch yard would be enough but I realize that I always need to have a train in continuous running; that means a loop of some kind.

In short, I would probably do most of the things that you more savvy and experience model railroaders already thought of.

And about the S gauge thing - I honestly do like O just fine!

I do believe that if i had to start over, I'd stick to scale-type models, and with TMCC or Legacy...

I'm not going to invest in adding DCS, so my MTH stuff will just sit on the shelf, and life is too short for inaccurate models like the same-old standby Lionel F-3s or GP-7s, with the incorrect side filters and oversize grab irons, rolling stock with cast in grab irons, or NYC FTs with dual headlights, or Railking Mohawks...

I went crazy when first entering the marketplace, and just gobbled up NYC stuff like it was going away for ever, and now I'm kicking myself.  Of course, I'm also stupid enough not to sell it, so those NIB MTH Premier PAs and scale F3s will just be shelf fodder.

Now I know...

Thanks,

Mario

One thing that I will say, is I will be building my layout with long runs and wide curves, even if it just more of a wide shelf than anything else, short mainline trains bug me, but that's just my opinion...

You can thank the king of long trains for solidifying that, TommyZ! 100-cars is just about right...

Thanks, again...

Mario

I would like to build a personal layout but do not have the room.  If I had it to do over again, looking back, when I added a 500 square feet room addition to my house I should of also added a basement to build a model train layout.  My contractor says it could still be done but I am sure it would be very costly for me at ths point.

 In lieu of my own personal layout I belong to a local railroad club that has an outstanding O scale layout in San Pedro, CA: Angels Gate HiRailers.

I did start over three years ago.

I tore the layout down, re-furbished the room with new lighting, carpet, paint to make in more welcoming. i downsized the layout from 24X20 to 16X12 to make in more manageable and make room for other things in the room (pinball, video arcade machines). I also went from as realistic as possible to fairly whimsical with several accessories. I enjoy relaxing in the room more now and it is much more the place where guests gather in our home.

Steve

Seeing the advancement of S Gauge over the past 10 years I would be starting up with S Gauge today.

Money is not an issue.

I would buy a modest size one story house just for trains. GG track, GG or Ross turnouts. The layout would be built high enough to easily work under. Building my layout too low was a major error on my part. Kids have no effect on layout height. They always look for something to sit or stand on anyway.

I am going to start over.

Just as soon as my recent "Start Over" is over

When I do start over everyone will ask me why I started over.

Over and over

I will say I don't really know why.

It's what we do.

Right?

Scrappy

No liftout sections or duck-unders!

Rusty

IF I COULD DO WHAT I WANTED NOW:

I would start over tomorrow if I could sell at least half of all the Lionel Standard O and MTH Premier freight cars I have and half of all the engines I have for at least 50% to 60% of what I bought it for.

Then I would tear down my layout and rebuild it to a nice 5 foot by 30 foot dogbone with no scenery with just signals and switches and a few light towers. I would probably use Lionel Legacy and maybe MTH DCS (haven't tried DCS yet).

A handful of nice diesels, one nice steam loco, one passenger train and 20 to 30 different cars would go a long way and I would be happy.

FREIGHTRAIN

I would have bought less than half of what I did. I'm selling stuff at 30% to 50% off of what I paid for it to cover other expenses. I'm quite picky now about what I buy. Also would have cut down on stuff by concentrating on a certain era (no diesels!). If I didn't have a ton of stuff already, I was thinking I should of just concentrated on a late 1800's period and purchased 3 or 4 of those awesome engines from SMR. They are pricey, but a lot cheaper than the 40+ MTH engines I did buy!

"Less definitely can be more, and that's a lesson many learn far too late."

Quoting a sign that I saw about 50 years ago, "We get too soon oldt and too late schmart". It hung in the German deli that I worked in.  Too bad I didn't pay more attention too it.

I would like to sell it all.

Clem K

My fantasy:

An industrial size building (say 5,000 sq feet) with no support pillars.

I would have display vignettes of O-gauge, with several loops going around the parameter. It would also include Flyer and Maerklin HO and gauge 1.

The purpose of the vignettes is to prevent the layout from becoming too big.

Outside would be G-scale (LGB).

I would have a full-time person to help set it up.

I would operate the vignettes according to my mood.

If I had the land, I would add a sit-on train, as well.

Mark

Mark (Barrister2u),

Are we related, as we seem to share the same dream? 

Whew!  I don't know if I can follow Mark's fantasy ambitions above but here goes...

Would sell off most of my O gauge and begin modelling in Large Scale. Mike's line and USA Trains, as well as Aristocraft make some BEAUTIFUL items that have tempted me for many years. Have you looked closely at USA's diecast steamers? There was a terrific deal on the FS board recently for one of their Hudsons w/wooden case, several cars, and a large power supply for just $2000.

Don't particularly want an outdoor RR but you really need a sizable facility to create in Large Scale what we do here in O...

Small can be satisfying and good fun if age, work, finances, space, health, lack of free time or family needs, place a limit on building a "dream" layout. If I had it to do over, the last layout I built at age 65 ['97] would have been smaller and in a different location so the larger space could be shared with my wife. As it was she eventually ran me out after 11 years and I dismantled in favor of her TV and Exercise room. The second thing,over the last 30 years I would not have pursued my addiction to all the passenger cars and articulated locomotives that are shelf "kings"!  

Effectively I am starting over with a much smaller [9x16] round-the-room attic layout than the two operations that I recently dismantled. Moving back from our Western N.C. Mountain retirement cottage to our Greensboro Condo due to issues of age, health and needing better med facilities, forced my hand. I dismantled the 16 year old 14x32 Mountain operation in '08 and the 11 year old 13x23/8x12 layout upstairs here in the Condo in '09. It was difficult to maintain either or both layouts and becoming less fun, but definitely no fun to destroy them. [I originally started in the mountains in 1986 with large scale but soon learned that the hostile terrain and weather at 4,000' was not conducive to fun!]

Today, at 80+years, I am slow and some what impaired but nevertheless making progress on my simpler, "senior citizen's" layout. Using recycled lumber, screws, track, turnouts,wire and electrical components,etc, I had it built and wired by Feb. 2010 with trains running, before health issues intervened and delayed work for 19 months. But I am back at it again, albeit much slower, and using more outside custom builders for structures and building fronts that "fit" the available acres, as I have to abandon many of the large footprint structures such as downtown buildings,theater, MTH Depot, etc,[tough to do when many are family gifts].

Also, I guess you could say that it gets more toy-like since I will be running short freight consists behind 2-8-0s or 2-8-2s and skinny 5 car passenger trains with a Pacific, a 4-6-0 or single A unit E Series diesel. Toy-like or not, I enjoy short and small as long as it not HO.  With 9' room width I retained wide end curves of 084/096 and 072/084 and have a drop section under the dual mainline to avoid a duckunder upon entry, better known as "crawl under" in the ancient years. I can still operate in Command and Conventional but no longer use the electronic modules to control turnouts from the handheld remote---I simply operate Tortoise DC powered turnouts with SPST toggles. 

Someone wrote that "small can be beautiful" and I now agree!

Being that I have never really been into building scenery, I think the next layout I build with be constructed of birch plywood, stained, and finished with spar varnish. The track will be traditional "O" gauge tubular, using several different radii. The accessories will be pieces commonly used in the 1940's and 1950's, made by Lionel, American Flyer, Plasticville, Colber, and the like.

It will probably be sized either 5 by 9 or 9 by 12.

This being the six or seventh layout (of various scales) I have built in my lifetime, my planning was based on experience and as a result I would change little.  But:

1) I would have spent the time (a month of more) to move one wall to get just 14 inches more room for one end of the layout.  I didn't then, I can't get at it now, with the layout there. It's not the additional 12 sq ft of layout I miss, its the fact those 14 inches would have permitted much different configurations of loop ends at that end of the layout.

2) I might have decided not to use Fastrack.  I must admit it was quick to set up and has been very satisfactory (particularly the switches).  But other track looks a bit more realistic.

Really, that's it.

I would have....

• started with scale only items just like Kanawah advised

• stuck to my original "N&W Only" theme (but man do I love those C&O paintjobs!)

• selected a different track system

• bought a different transformer

• focused on finishing what I had started before starting something else

1. Selected only what I would chose to run and have the discipline to avoid purchasing anything that would not fit in that design

2.  Develop a plan with the broadest curves the space permitted

3.  Did a full scale mock up before every building anything because the "minds eye" apparently sees things that physics will not allow.

4.  Learn to do a better job with scenery and not fill the space with trains.

5.  Despite a desire to have a larger layout, limit myself to something that can be completed properly in a single lifetime.

6.  Keep everything as simple as possible, track plan, wiring, etc

7.  think about a background BEFORE ever buiding the benchwork

Thank you everyone for your collective wisdom, and please, keep it coming!

If money was unlimited, I would build an outbuilding.  Nothing huge but it would allow me to better separate the layout from the rest of the house and perhaps not feel so embarrassed to have people over to run trains.  It would also allow me to have the details such as lighting, wall placement, carpeting, power outlets (and capacity) all taken into account from the beginning.  We started with a finished basement and the temptation is not to do anything too drastic to it because it serves as our family room.

My mistakes.  I thought my biggest regret would be waiting so long to actually build a table and have a starter layout but it was actually failing to accommodate at least an O72 minimum curve.  No sooner did I settle on my track plan and build my table than I came into 2 engines that really need those wider radius curves.  I would strongly recommend at least considering or planning for O72 minimum curves.

My best move:

As I've mentioned on other threads, I have a rather tight train budget.  This has been very frustrating at times but sticking to this has made me keep my priorities in order.  I think and think and think before I buy anything.  The release of the Christmas catalog has forced me to shuffle my priorities yet again.  Is this limiting?  I guess so but I also look at it as liberating.  As several people have mentioned above, "less is more" and I agree.  So deciding on a limited budget has kept me free and more importantly kept my wife on board.

Four years ago I built my first O-Gauge layout, 7-ft x 19-ft using Fastrack, to gain some practice in anticipation of moving to a new house. We moved August 2010, and I started on my new layout in Feb 2011 after finishing our basement first.

The layout still is under construction, but I have identified a few things I would have done differently, and many that I am really glad I did the way I actually did the.

What I would have done differently.

• Use all Atlas turnouts (used 45) instead of also using a few RCS (used 12)

• Ballast the track that I knew would not change, as soon as it was installed. This was the case with the double main, the main yard, and the sidings. The only thing I have changed a bit has been a few spurs. I am adding the ballast now, after all the track is installed, and it is going to be a challenge in some areas.

• Mount all TIU’s and AIU’s so they are easy to access. One of my two TIU’s and its three AIU’s are under the layout for the sake of centralized distribution. I was able to locate the other TIU and two AIU’s along the edge of the layout, and this works better.

• Unless the track is isolated, as graded track usually is, do not cut the support to fit just the track. I did this in several places, but had to fill in the empty spaces adjacent to the track for the roads, buildings, signals, etc.

What I am so glad I did the way I did and am doing.

• 2 x 4s for the frame. It may be overkill, but it was cheaper, and when I climb on top of the layout nothing moves, gives, or squeaks.

• Use as large curves as possible. The Ø108” and Ø99” I used for the main work and look great. Larger would have been even better.

• Accurate measurement (within 1/8-inch or less) when laying all the track to match the RR-Track layout, and cut any track within 1/16”. Also, trace the curves on the board even when using sectional track.

• Main level at 48”. This allows me to sit on a small dolly (I made it) and wheel around under the layout without hitting my head. I have built platforms for people to stand on to view the layout.

• Combination of fluorescent and incandescent lighting, with separately switched banks of lights to control intensity. This is great for pictures and to show different effects.

• Access hatches wherever possible.

• Atlas track and turnouts.

• Double reversing loops for each main, and several crossovers between the mains.

• Totally independent “L” train and subway train.

• Started with DCS and the added Legacy. I believe DCS is great for controlling turnouts and accessories, and is just fine to control the trains. The Legacy system, particularly the remote, and the Legacy engines are simply great.

More to come as I think of it . . .

GOOD THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alex

Along the lines of less is more.  This is why I like dealer displays.  Not all of them, but most of them. The creators and the builders had to cram a lot of action into a small space to get your attention.  But if you like running long prototypical trains, an 8 foot by 8 foot layout might be small.

As far as the layout goes, whatever new ideas presented themselves might be used.  I've made each layout different, with a new idea or two on each.

For the collection, I'd probably limit it to "S", i.e. American Flyer & Marx 3/16 scale "O" gauge.  My current layout has one run of 2-rail GarGraves for AF, and two runs of O27 of various curve diameters.

S-scale still is woefully lacking in locomotive offerings when my desired prototypes

are considered. Just "any Pacific" won't do.

I wish that I had the discipline to have Hudsons/Niagara/Mohawks/USRA 2-6-6-2's/USRA

0-6-0's and 0-8-0's - and nothing else. About a dozen locos of my very favorites. 60-65

freight cars, one passenger train. That's it.

But I don't, and those of us who have way too much because we are undisciplined and

cursed with substantial funds would start over today - and wind up with just about the

same situation in a few years. It's a personality (disorder?) that is acquisitive to a 

fault. It's not the trains, it's us. "The fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves", or

something pretty close to that. All that stuff in the next room and on my layout

generally does not make me happy. When I face that I will be offering some sweet deals.

Two things come to mind:

1. Make the main line a twice-around. Even on a large layout, a simple loop is too short.

2. Make the grade on the mainline loop constant from one end to the other, so that the speed of conventional locos need be adjusted only twice per lap, instead of constant babysitting due to constant changes in grade. Better yet, make no grades at all on the main; put all grades on secondary trackage.

I'd probably go G scale and do a "generic" RR.

The bigger engines and rolling stock look great and are fairly inexpensive compared to a lot of O scale stuff.  Even comes with DCC in a lot of cases.

I'm worn out from trying to find Seaboard Air Line equipment, pleading with the manufacturers to make it, and tired of building my own only to have to source for decals.

A "generic" RR could be anything I'd want it to be, whether or not its G or O scale.  I'm kinda leaning towards an O scale generic RR anyway.  I'm working on a 4-6-0 that I hope looks a lot like a Seaboard Ten-Wheeler, but it might have a Vanderbilt tender, a combination Seaboard didn't use.  All I have to do is make my own decals and I'm set.

If I did start over, I would walk into my layout room in the morning and build new benchwork that would look more finished/professional than what I have now.

 Slow down, you move too fast, you've got to make the morning last

I would have slowed down and not tried to get the layout done as quickly as possible. I wish I could have just laid down the tracks (so I could run trains as soon as possible of course) but slowly build outward from those tracks, taking my time to build the best layout I could and enjoy the process a lot more. Scenery hiccups would be at a minimum, quality would be at a high, and boy would those wires under the layout be a lot more organized!

I would have not made all the impulse purchases of other roads I do not run.

I also would have done a around the room layout instead, but that would have required moving the main electrical box for the house, rebuilding the sump pump closet, and much more time before I could get the layout up and running.  Right now I am happy to be running trains on my 1st real layout since I was a kid.  

Assuming my dreams of global domination come to fruition:

I'd take personal possession of LAUPT (Union Station, Los Angeles) and convert the ticketing pavilion to an indoor O scale layout. A #1 Gauge outdoor layout will be constructed in the South Patio that used to be the Pacific Electric terminal connection.

My private train would be parked on Track 11 after having a private platform constructed. Amtrak and Metrolink operations would continue as I'd collect fees from them. The Gold Line could operate on the provision that they repaint all of the Gold Line cars to LARy Yellow and Green, and the Blue Line/Green Line cars to PE Red, naming the lines to Los Angeles Railway and Pacific Electric, respectively.

All North American Railroads shall immediately adopt "Heritage Schemes" as their official paint schemes. They will be allowed to add a tag line "A [insert name of corporation here] company." All will also be required to keep at least one operating steam locomotive on active roster in revenue or excursion service.

Likewise, Amtrak shall paint their passenger trains to match the original roads that served their routes.

Airlines shall be prosecuted for crimes against humanity for the following offenses:

• Coach seats designed for people five feet tall and 110 pounds.
• Overbooking
• Serving so-called food that even the dog won't touch.
• Hiring incompetent baggage/security screeners that led to the hiring of invasive TSA baggage/security screeners.

Their sentences will be mitigated by the fact that air fares have not gone up in relation to inflation. However, the fact they're losing so much money indicates poor management.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go to my weekly megalomaniac support group meeting.

i am an old person only 6 months into "0" scale lionel because "0" scale has been developed. if i were a young person i would go american flyer "S" scale. its smaller but not too small. it can offer everything lionel "0" scale offers only on 2 rails plus more track and scenery for a given area. in time i believe 2 rail a/f will overtake 3 rail lionel.

I would have bought that steam locomotive and 6 heavyweights that were listed for $30,000.00 in the Tradin' Times back in 1982?. It was located in a scrapyard somewhere in Michigan.

OR

I'd build my layout just like Sir Tony Lash did..except with a triple track mainline  

I guess my take on that would be:  Didn't happen over all these years, and I can't imagine that it will happen in the future.  I would be willing to put big money on that, but I won't be around by the time S comes even close to being where O gauge was 15 years ago or more.

S is a great scale/gauge, no question about that, but this hobby, overall, is past the point where there will be any big "shakeup" of the scale rankings in the future.  It will very likely remain HO at the top, N in second place, O in the third position, and all the rest way down the ladder.

I would get a larger layout (I'm working on an 8x8 right now) even though it is hard in Florida since we don't have basements. This would allow larger curves and a prototypical yard.I would also get a more realistic track system like Atlas or Gargraves.