Looking for advice as I consider a new layout...

So here is a draft of the bones of what I am thinking.....this just has the main lines without yards and sidings etc to follow.  Just wanted to get down the basic plan.  This accomplishes some of the goals

1.  double track mainline with minimum of 88 curves to run 21" passenger cars room for nice size passenger yard and a downtown all to be in bottom section bracketed by the red loop.   minimal switches on the double main line.  

2.  Large freight yard and separate main line with 72 curves for freight with town to operation and back to the staging yard.  Access to get out on the double main line.  

3.  Loops to reverse trains

4.  Corners would be tough to get to but no switches in back corners.

Love to hear thoughts suggestions.....

still learning railmodeller pro...not sure why some of the elevations don't look right - for instance all gold track is on base level but doesn't show that way despite track above having elevation.   Any tips from experts would be appreciated.

I like the way it wraps back across itself and has a reverse loop for both directions.  It's a nice plan if you have access to all sides.  But since you noted that the corners will be tough, I think you'll have some issues.

The reverse loop switches in the top middle are a long reach, and IMO a likely source of frustration since they'll be a long way from the pop-up areas for the loops.  The switch leading to the lower right return loop looks like it will be particularly challenging to reach because it will be far from the edge or a pop-up.

Remember, our trains are aware that people are watching, and they know when they're in an inaccessible location.       

Just my two cents, I have a separate building next to my house for my train layout (25' away) and there are many times especially in the winter I don't even want to go out to the train building. I have to put on a coat, shoes, sometimes shovel snow from the sidewalk to the building. While I love my train building, I really wish I had a basement big enough in the house, so I could just walk down there without a coat, shoes, etc. For me, I would probably never get the layout done if it was a distance from my house. You definitely have some thinking to do!!  Good luck

Jeff

@Mallard4468 posted:

I like the way it wraps back across itself and has a reverse loop for both directions.  It's a nice plan if you have access to all sides.  But since you noted that the corners will be tough, I think you'll have some issues.

The reverse loop switches in the top middle are a long reach, and IMO a likely source of frustration since they'll be a long way from the pop-up areas for the loops.  The switch leading to the lower right return loop looks like it will be particularly challenging to reach because it will be far from the edge or a pop-up.

Remember, our trains are aware that people are watching, and they know when they're in an inaccessible location.       

yes there certainly needs to be some tweaking....I don't want to fight reach...I do some of that now.....but I kinda like the basic plan.

I don't understand what the blue square is, or why you left so much space open to the left of the lower peninsula. It seems to me there is room to extend the two main lines along the right wall and have their turnback curves either in the lower right corner or even along the bottom wall.  If the double track mainline is raised as a high line, you'll still have room on the ground for all the features you want in the lower peninsula.

MSP,  wow quite a thread.  Regarding the track plan, consider the key elements you want and then the extras. I found yards and passenger terminals take up a lot of space. Then consider where will they be grade wise. Grades need length to gain elevation - a lot of it. An 8 car passenger train will be close to 200 inches long. Do you want all the cars at a platform? Then add at least 36 inches for yard switches and another 48 for a curve at one end. Want something through running? More space needed. Even with your space, you are gobbling it up. Same situation with yards. What about industries or towns to tie the railroad together?  Now you can start to lay out a track plan.

PM or email me, there are several resources I can direct you towards. My ongoing rebuild of TPRR covers some of the issues with wants and realities of space. There are many other similar stories on this forum. Jeff.

I'm with Mallard that I like how the mainline loops back and forth.  In agreement with several others' concerns, I think you are going to have to provide access in the center of every loop.

@Ken Wing posted:

I don't understand what the blue square is, or why you left so much space open to the left of the lower peninsula. It seems to me there is room to extend the two main lines along the right wall and have their turnback curves either in the lower right corner or even along the bottom wall.  If the double track mainline is raised as a high line, you'll still have room on the ground for all the features you want in the lower peninsula.

the blue square is essentially where there will be a actual garage....I didn't outline the room but it basically ends at the blue square....and yes  - you wouldn't know where it ends on the other side because I have not added....I have made some tweaks I will post when i get a little further with it - i don't really like that corner.

@ScoutingDad posted:

MSP,  wow quite a thread.  Regarding the track plan, consider the key elements you want and then the extras. I found yards and passenger terminals take up a lot of space. Then consider where will they be grade wise. Grades need length to gain elevation - a lot of it. An 8 car passenger train will be close to 200 inches long. Do you want all the cars at a platform? Then add at least 36 inches for yard switches and another 48 for a curve at one end. Want something through running? More space needed. Even with your space, you are gobbling it up. Same situation with yards. What about industries or towns to tie the railroad together?  Now you can start to lay out a track plan.

PM or email me, there are several resources I can direct you towards. My ongoing rebuild of TPRR covers some of the issues with wants and realities of space. There are many other similar stories on this forum. Jeff.

Yes that is my "problem"  I like yards but it does gobble of space....basically, passenger yard in the starting where the red is coming off the main line going the entire distance to the loops and freight yard on the right side with the 72 loop.

I will take you up on your email offer - thanks.

Industry and towns in the middle.

@Mark Boyce posted:

I'm with Mallard that I like how the mainline loops back and forth.  In agreement with several others' concerns, I think you are going to have to provide access in the center of every loop.

recetified one of the loops with the new plan.....agree may have access in the other but it will be emergency only because plan to have scenery back there save the back main lines...no switches back there.

So while not quite ready for publication - I thought I would get it out there.  Again, very much a draft but you can see some the changes I made without changing the basic premiss of the layout.  Granted the passenger yard needs ALOT of work but you get drift for the overall idea.  Also plan to clean up the table where not so many corners....

1.  Double track mainlines of passenger trains with minimum of 080.  Minimum switches on those main lines.

2.  Primarily freight line with yard and access to industries and small towns....

3.  Large classification yards

4.  Access everywhere except back left corner  maybe a lake back there

Anyway, more to come...I appreciate everyone's interest....I might be a little ahead of the game but having fun playing with it.

i apologize for the ink...printer needs some ink.

I’m still liking it.  Keep looking at it each day.  

Please share the grid size. Also, is that the entrance at bottom?

ok the color rectangles at the bottom represent the room walls.   Wall along the "top" is 30', 32' along the right freight side and 24" along the left side....table goes 22'

Made a couple of tweaks....thinking in top right corner a yard for containers....all of the bottom" will be downtown with the passenger yard running right through it....probably the end of the sidings will be under the city.  think I need to add back the red passenger yard loop

Small towns in the middle loops...

you can go from the freight yard to either of the towns...passenger train can use use the "freight" loop for turnaround

need to figure out the passenger yard.. don't really like that yet.

here is another slight variation on the passenger yard - takes out the need to elevate over....but lose the bridge crossover

Not an improvement. Not great main line length, can't follow train over run with remote, three blobs. I think you can do better with this space. Curious what your "Druthers" are (per John Armstrong), i.e., what is most important for you in your layout?

@Ken Wing posted:

Not an improvement. Not great main line length, can't follow train over run with remote, three blobs. I think you can do better with this space. Curious what your "Druthers" are (per John Armstrong), i.e., what is most important for you in your layout?

I agree already back to the original...not sure what you mean by thee blobs though?

As @Ken Wing mentioned.  If you  haven't I would highly recommend you create the list of "Must Haves" vs "Nice to Haves" for your layout.   It's totally personal and depends on what you want to end up with and how you want to use the layout.  If you just want to run a bunch of trains continuously there are designs that lend themselves to that, if you want to run passenger trains and service it's somewhat of a different design than a model RR that runs freight. 

Do you want to switch cars and drop off and pick up cars, then you should decide what industries are of interest, Coal, Agriculture, Urban Factories Warehouses, etc.   I suggest you read up on "Interchanges" for great but not too demanding switching of cars, I added and interchange to my layout when I was about 3/4 way into the build and it was one of the best additions.   Do you want a classification yard with Arrival and Departure tracks to break up and make up freight trains.

My layout is 23 x 40, it's pretty much around the room, I am really glad I made it a folded over dog bone that has a single main line that's around 240 feet long.   I almost always run 3 long trains on that main, 25 + cars.  My minimum diameter is 096, so 48 inch radius and I wouldn't recommend anything smaller if you want to run 21 inch passenger cars, large articulated steam engines and just in general be able to run really long trains without issues.

It you don't go through the Druther's Analysis by John Allen, you take the risk of not being over the moon satisfied a few years down the road. 

Layouts of this size take quite a bit of time and effort to design and build (IMHO).....  Might as well do the planning research so you end up with what you really want.

My son shot this Layout Tour and Update video for me several Christmas's ago.   Many forum members kept asking for a track plan and I didn't have an as built track plan that one could really make any sense of, so I did kind a tutorial walk around explaining why I designed it like I did what most of the spurs, sidings, arrival departure tracks are and why. Here's link if you'd like to watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_11HRZciRU

John Armstrong defined "blobs" as sections of layouts that had reversing loops, helixes, or lightbulb-shaped turnback curves with no center access. They take up a lot of space, don't look realistic, and often have poor access.  A 180-degree curve with an aisle in the middle would not be a blob. Armstrong, who was paid to custom design many layouts, actually subtracted blob space from the total available. In some cases, a blob was a necessary evil, but in others, a waste due solely to poor design.

I have four of his books, and heard him present twice at national NMRA conventions, most recently in 1993. He was the king of layout design, and he never stopped learning.

I must say this thread is receiving lots of great advice.  I would just say this to you with complete sincerity.  You are approaching 59 years old. Still very young, however, Things happen beyond our control.  Especially health wise.  Secondly, time flies.  I will say though if you maintain decent health, the 60s can be very good years,  until you finally hit 69.. And nature just takes over and you inadvertently slow down.  Something else that is quite important.  Your spouse.  Let's take a Thursday, after work you stop at the layout.  You start working, and realize you forgot something.

Do you move on and do something else???  The Mrs, home alone, waiting, dinner, no dinner.  Most wives don't like being alone at home for very long...  Again, not judging, but if it was me, }Sounds like you have the funds{  I would invest , all or none, and make a move that is conducive to happiness not only for you, but your wife as well.

Remember, "Happy Wife, Happy Life"...  In the end you'll decide.  As you do and will get older, you'll want less aggravation, not more, driving back and forth  to enjoy your hobby.  That becomes more like working a job.  As you get up in years, do you really want all that back and forth.  Now if that's what you prefer, being alone, peace and quiet..go for it, and enjoy it.  And Goodluck..  Just remember this.  Did you ever see a luggage rack on a hearse?? You can't take it with you..so spend it..LOL..

Thanks for all at the advice on the move.  I realize I asked the question.   We are under contract for 25 acres in the county - wife is very excited.  We are going to have a building where we can go spend weekends - whatever remains to be seen but that is the plan.   If over time if we really enjoy it we will move full time out there.   In the mean time I will build a building  that would accommodate a nice train layout and essentially be a 1 br apartment .  If we ending moving full time the apartment can house aging parents  returning children etc . Again, if it never happens it will be a nice building with a nice workshop garage whatever.   Think barndominium.   They  are all over.   Some guys have tractors, some have hunting fishing gear some have cars....mine will have trains.  Obviously,  as has been stated this is a long term proposition.   The layout is at least a year away...as was said a lot can happen.   May decide in a year I hate and sell the whole thing....if not will start the process of moving trains out there.   Start building a new layout without having to take the first one down completely....just cannabolize it slowly.   Worst case would be I build a layout and don't move there.  But again, these decisions will be made over time....once i get a feel that we will end up there will start working on the layout.   As stated above, if we never use - well, probably won't start a layout.   

As I said before, this is not a case of just building something to go run trains in.   It is a land investment, possible retirement home and oh by the way....potentially a great place to have a train layout.

So I am ready to move the conversation to the actual layout.  Glad to hear approaching 59 is "still very young"   This aging thing  is interesting, I am now older than my doctor, preacher and boss!

To the plan - Is Track planning for realistic operation the consensus Armstrong book to read?

Nice video Chris A and even nicer layout.  

@kenwing I understand about the blobs....the intent to disguise them as much as possible with tunnels, scenery, etc....the bottom blob will be filled with a downtown with buildings all over it and disguised somewhat by city buildings

The good news is I have plenty of time to plan and get great advice here.

Thanks for everyone's interest

BTW - someone mentioned shoveling snow.  I am in North Florida been here 50 years never had snow like we did this week.  Had 3 to 4 inches stick and it is still around.  I don't know how anyone deals with it on the regular.   Basically shut us down for 2 days.   I know basically a spring day for you guys in up north.

It sounds like a good plan!  It seems to me, no matter the future, you are making a good investment!  As long as your wife is happy, you can’t lose!  

Yes, Track Planning for Realistic Operation is THE best book in my opinion.  I had the opportunity to visit John Armstrong’s layout once and see the scenes he depicts in the book.  Remember, he modeled O gauge outside third rail.  

I can identify with doctor, pastor, boss all younger than me; for the last 20 years that was so, though I’ve been retired for 5 years.

Yes I used Track Planning for Realistic Operation, and at least one or two others, I found one other on my shelf also by John Armstrong, must have picked it up at a train show used :   "John Armstrong on Creative Layout Design"  1978, Kalmbach books...   There's some overlap but it's good if you can find a used copy.

I also found some value checking out HO layout plans as there are so many more to scan through,  I just used a rule of thumb which was to check out HO layouts that had about 1/2 the footprint size of what I was building

My last comment would be I remember reading some articles by Tony Koester who proposed an idea that you design the really important modules you want to have, ie Engine Service Facility, Coal Mine Run, Interchange etc. all by themselves independent of the big layout drawing, and then incorporate these modules into your design.

It helped me focus on making sure I planned those elements well and wasn't distracted by all the other issues... Where will this fit, how will look next to whatever, what access do I need.  The first one of these I did was the Steam Engine Service facility and it worked really well.   

Chris, I forgot about Creative Layout Design.  I have it too.  I bought those books not long after they were published.  
Also, if you are a member of the NMRA, there is a Layout Design SIG, Small Interest Group.  They have a lot of good ideas, but I couldn’t make use of so much in O Gauge in an 11 X 11 room.

Here is the latest....the rework is the red....the passenger yard.  I know it is a lot of track.  Let me tell you what i like...  you come in off the main line....you can either go to the south yard or the north yard.....then loop your  way out on the other side.  The loop will be covered with downtown buildings....that entire Blob will be covered with downtown buildings...I think will disguise it enough....  a train in each passenger yard can be qued up to follow the other out.  Small engine yard -3 thru tracks on each side.  couple of stub sidings.

all the shapes are poor attempt at downtown buildings.....

Also bottom left (gold) is the container yard and little harbor...

Give some thought to scenic treatment of this area of crowded track. You mentioned the blob portion, but the narrow portion up and left of that also needs to be considered.

Yes, so my thought there is the two main lines and lead to the container yard coming around the bend will go into a tunnel underneath the 2 main lines so all you will see there at the bend is the two elevated main lines and the red passenger yard.

Trying to imagine a situation where a railroad would tunnel through a hill at the same time another one was on the top of it. Might want to mock that scene up in a model. It does call to mind the short tunnel opposite the Ivy City engine terminal in DC that served an industrial area. If the upper tracks could be moved to be in front of instead of over, that could work. I would also take a look at how John Allen handled the tunnel with high line next to Great Divide station.

I have a track over top of another on my layout.  The lower track emerges about a foot to the left of the upper track.  It’s not ideal, but it works.

@Ken Wing posted:

Trying to imagine a situation where a railroad would tunnel through a hill at the same time another one was on the top of it. Might want to mock that scene up in a model. It does call to mind the short tunnel opposite the Ivy City engine terminal in DC that served an industrial area. If the upper tracks could be moved to be in front of instead of over, that could work. I would also take a look at how John Allen handled the tunnel with high line next to Great Divide station.

yea I like the idea....move the elevated track to the right (center of the table) and the other go behind it.

up as mentioned above...

I'm now completely in the dark as to the elevations of the track. The two bridges/tunnels look like they pass over green and blue tracks and under yellow. But the lowest level green track and highest level yellow track have a crossover between them a short distance away, so I'm guessing yellow is really below. Similarly, the red track crossing the tunnel tracks seems to be over them, but I'm guessing it really passes under them.

Yes, so the blue green coming down from the left side are elevated over gold and red.  For some reason i can't get the elevation right.  I have marked the elevation at 6" for the entire span that is raised but it is arbitrary which tracks look raised or not.  Not sure why that is.

I have added another version moving the container yard giving room to have full access to the passenger yard.   I made some adjustment to the passenger yard...moving sidings to the bottom side.  So train comes in on bottom side and can stage on "top side" to go out -  engine yard on top side.

I'm assuming blue/green is a double track main to be operated with right hand running.

1) Will passenger trains on the blue line simply stop adjacent to the red tracks, or will they back into the passenger station?

2) A passenger train on the green line can enter the passenger station via the crossover, but afterward will be traveling in the normal direction for the blue track. Currently there is no way to turn a train to go forward in the green line direction without backing around the passenger terminal loop. Eventually, all trains will be going in the blue direction.

So,

@Ken Wing posted:

I'm assuming blue/green is a double track main to be operated with right hand running.

1) Will passenger trains on the blue line simply stop adjacent to the red tracks, or will they back into the passenger station?

2) A passenger train on the green line can enter the passenger station via the crossover, but afterward will be traveling in the normal direction for the blue track. Currently there is no way to turn a train to go forward in the green line direction without backing around the passenger terminal loop. Eventually, all trains will be going in the blue direction.

So that is good point...my initial thought was the reverse for the passenger trains would on the gold reverse loop.   That does take some maneuvering because you will have to cross over  main line to get to the turnaround.  My intention for the gold line was it to be exclusively freiht, except just for one loop to turn a passenger train around.   The gold has O72 so it would work and just be used for a single reverse trip.   Maybe not ideal but that is what would have to happen as it stands...Then blue or green line could reverse into the red station loop.

I have attached another revision that gets rid of one of the blobs.  I really don't want a duck under.  I have one now that I just removed because I hate ducking under it.   I just use the other side of my elevated track and have a bridge to nowhere.  As I have drawn this i could operate the layout and never had to duck under....could really all sidings without having to regularly duck under.....so maybe an option to consider.  Also to have a removable duck under would be easier if the track was straight across....

I also moved the container yard and the harbor...

thoughts?

I personally do not find this an improvement. Much more mainline is now hard to get to due to the duck under. What you called a blob was truly one for the yellow track, but not for green and blue--a backdrop down the middle you could access on both sides would "de-blob" that for them.

My new fantasy, based on the previous version: Get the blue/green tracks at upper right to walk-under height at that location, eliminate the yellow track on the left side of the right aisle, and make a new aisle into the center of the yellow loop at top and to the left. The blob you eliminated now becomes a lobe in the center of the room, and lots of track gets to become up close and personal.

I can't work out the elevations and grades from here, but it seems a worthy endeavor.

Very interesting - is that what you were thinking....I will go back and tighten it up  maybe move what is now the middle finger down some to make more room in the back

When you say walk under height....will still be a duck under but maybe a little less of one?

that makes my gold line simply a loop to loop and takes out the circular option....

still not convinced about my passenger trains reversal....

okay revised

Well this is starting to look really interesting. You found a way to reverse passenger trains using the yellow loop. All the yellow track is up front and personal due to the rear aisle--a great aid in freight switching and general viewing. Grades and elevation need to be addressed to deal with the green/blue aisle crossing. For a true walk under, it would need to clear your head. The question is whether the rest of the track could be at a good viewing level while maintaining reasonable grades in that case. I think it likely. Our eyes are about 6 inches below the top of our heads, and viewing most trains near eye level is most realistic-- with some above and some below. If you want youngsters to be able to view the layout at eye level as well, various platforms or steps can accomplish that without sacrificing your own viewing pleasure. There is no need to insist on a true walkunder. One six inches shorter than you, for example, is not going to be the difference between whether you can get in there or not as your health status changes, while a 42" duck under could be.

Liking the evolution here, and looking forward to your next iteration...

@Ken Wing posted:

Well this is starting to look really interesting. You found a way to reverse passenger trains using the yellow loop. All the yellow track is up front and personal due to the rear aisle--a great aid in freight switching and general viewing. Grades and elevation need to be addressed to deal with the green/blue aisle crossing. For a true walk under, it would need to clear your head. The question is whether the rest of the track could be at a good viewing level while maintaining reasonable grades in that case. I think it likely. Our eyes are about 6 inches below the top of our heads, and viewing most trains near eye level is most realistic-- with some above and some below. If you want youngsters to be able to view the layout at eye level as well, various platforms or steps can accomplish that without sacrificing your own viewing pleasure. There is no need to insist on a true walkunder. One six inches shorter than you, for example, is not going to be the difference between whether you can get in there or not as your health status changes, while a 42" duck under could be.

Liking the evolution here, and looking forward to your next iteration...

So, on on the gold reverse loop....I think I can do that in something greater than o72 so that is a plus when reversing passenger trains.   I am 6"2"  still a little hight than I think I want a bridge .......might have to duck some....and in any event... could operate the entire layout with not going back there unless i wanted to....don't have that luxury in current set up I have to be back and forth under the duck under.

My only concern, I have cut off to much space for town scenery etc.   I guess there is still plenty of room for a town where the middle finger loop is.   Another idea is to move the container yard to the back left - with the access now you could get back there....the very back corner would be the "harbor"  and the container yard in front???  So very little need for back access...just in emergency.

thanks for the help.

More to come....