Loop running without the extra's.

A "loop runner" is what most of my layout in progress appears it will become. I'll likely have one small yard off to the side to accomodate various accessories in action, but the more I work with my basic removable module, the more I realize that three main loops will be the prinicpal feature.

Besides, when friends come over to see another's layout, isn't loop running what is usually done? I say go for it.

B&OBill

Rick

16x27 is a wonderful amount of space to work with.  It is good to read "Planning planning, planning."  The more closely you can define what you really want now the sooner you will be running a layout that you will enjoy without having the costs in time and money of redoing something experience shows to be less than satisfying. 

With over 400 square feet you have a good size space.  What trains do you have?  Is you collection Post-War or do you have modern equipment too?  Do you have any trains requiring O-72.  Do you want to have some of your trains on display shelves or would you like them on the layout?

Most people find placing trains on the layout and taking them off again to be something less than the most enjoyable part of the hobby.  A storage yard would allow you to keep your main lines clear and run different trains without constantly taking them on and off the layout.  A separate yard and engine service facility would allow you to assemble trains and route cars to different destinations. 

Switching freight cars in a yard to route them to their destination may sound awful model railroaderish and not very "toy train like."  But toy train coal and log dump cars have to get from loaders to dumpers just like their scale cousins.  Unless you want to tie up the main line to dump a car you will want sidings for any classic operating accessories you may have.

If you have friends come over to run their trains I would suggest having a yard track located at the edge of the layout that can have power toggled off.  That way you can continue to run trains while your friends place cars on the track and not have to worry about causing a short.

Tell us more about what you want out of your layout.  Depending on your preferences we can talk more about yards, yard leads, facing vs. trailing point switches, crossovers, etc.

What I have right now is a pair of loops on 2 levels...and Im already becoming nervous that I will become tired of this very soon...even before the scenery is done. Ill be adding a yard and dockside industry as soon as time permits. I wish I had that kind of space to work with, your very lucky!

Sorry to take so long to relpy. I have been away from the computer for a few days. I have more "new" trains than post war. The layout will be for "hosting" others trains so 0-72 as a min. curve on at least one route is a must. I realize removing trains is a bummer...but if someone brings thier trains to run it is just part of the evening. I am sure I will have at least one siding and maybe two. I have TMCC but will upgrade to Legacy when all is up and running. I guess like everyone else...my space is not big enough for my desires!

Rick.

I always thought a nice touch would be having a siding or two, easily accessible from the side of the layout, long enough for visitors to assemble their trains and bring them out onto the layout when ready, as well as allowing them to park it for pack-up while the rest of the layout continues to operate.

---PCJ

Rick,

Wow, just how many friends do you plan on having over?!?!?!

Seriously, do you plan on running trains when your friends are not over?

I say this because, with the space you have, you could have a fantastic layout to run/operate trains as a real railroad does.

I went to see Ed Rappe's (Keystoned Ed) layout at the first of the year and his layout room may have been approx the same size as yours, maybe larger.  He had a beautifully designed track plan and when he ran a train for me I was astounded, watching it go thru all the ups and downs, ins and outs.  I would have loved to have had a train of my own to run around his layout, but it's 2 rail.

Removing heavy engines, particularly steam, from a layout often can only induce problems with the tethers at a later date, even a small yard or track near the edge would solve both having to remove the engines frequently and allowing your friends to place their engines on the layout without a lot of trouble.

If it were me, I'd build it with running trains in mind, in and out of scenery, instead of just a couple of loops.

Whichever way you go good luck!

Rick

The layout should be whatever you want it to be.  I  made a conscious choice to build a prewar toy train layout rather than a model railroad and am very happy with what I have. In addition never be afraid to rip out some or all of what you have and do something else.

BoB D.

I hope I have a bunch of Friends!!! In Planning I am begining to see the need for a yard. Nothing complex but to accomodate a few trains for running at any point in time. As for scenery, remember The Clinchfield Railroad motto: Over, Under, Around and Through!

Al....I thought about that (tinplate), I really did. I would love to see photo's of your layout.

Rick.

Rick,

For the longest time all I've thought about was performing switching moves.  When I got a couple of OK Engines passenger cars I realized I like watching a passenger trains go roundy-round just as much.  I wish I had your space for a passenger train more than 5 cars long, I would have the track going in and out of scenery, looping back, all kinds of things to make the train disappear then reappear somewhere else.  Operations/switching could also be incorporated without a lot of effort.

Whatever you do, take your time and make sure you have the plan you want.  Put some track down temporarily and run some trains to see how you like it.

I started my upstairs layout a year ago and have already changed the track plan 3-4 times.  It's not fun tearing up ballasted track but it's also not fun running trains on a plan that doesn't do what you expected.  Right now I have the mainline ballasted, but none of the sidings (just in case ).

"I went to see Ed Rappe's (Keystoned Ed) layout at the first of the year and his layout room may have been approx the same size as yours, maybe larger."

MAYBE larger?  In terms of square footage, Ed's room is about 5 times larger.

Bob,

Thanks, I couldn't remember just how large it was I was so overwhelmed , the visual sensors just couldn't take it all in.  He had more track in "The Curve" than I do on my entire layout!

Bob B.

Your Railroad is Great. I have been on your web pag a lot, the idea of a true point to point is really neat.

Which brings me to my issue....I want everything in a layout. Point to point, loop running, detailed scenes, traditional and scale trains etc........(sigh)!

Rick.

Bob D.

Is there a web sight for Ed Rappe's layout?

Many Thanks.

Rick.

Rick,

Ed said it (maybe an older version of what he has now) was in one of the model railroad mags at one time, but I don't recall when or which one.  He's usually over on the 2-rail forum so you might want to give that a look.

Thank You for the replies.

Now, who/whom(?) would be willing to convert a hand drawn pdf scan with specs. of my layout idea into a computer generated file? What would it cost? Me email is in my profile.

Thanks again.

Rick.

Rick:

Have you bought your track yet or committed to Lionel "O"?

The reason I'm asking is that there are other options available from different track brands. For example, Atlas has #5 turnouts which allow for closer spacing along spurs. The trade-off is that the straight leg of the turnout is 20" long. Atlas also has more curve diameters available than traditional Lionel "O" track.

Gargraves flex is pretty easy to work with, plus you can use Ross turnouts without modification. Gargraves also sells fixed diameter curves in various sizes as well; so does Ross.

MTH ScaleTrax has a #4 that is about 15" long and allows for close spacing, plus the flex track is easy to set up. The tie spacing is a bit wide, but the rail height is lower than the other brands. Rich Battista's video shows how to deal with it effectively.

Hi Matt,

I have a large sum of Lionel O Gauge track, turnouts etc. I also have a good stash of Atlas "O" 0-54. I AM torn at this point as to which to use. I like the well detailed layouts and I like the more Lionel-ish layouts. When the building is done I will be forced to decide. In my thinking, I could start with Lionel 0-72 on simple roadbed and convert to Atlas O or Gargraves later if the need (wanting more detail) should hit me! For now, I am just dreaming and drawing (as you well know).

After thought: I would like to see a layout that is a cross between toy trains and detailed scene's. Just how well do the two mix?

Thanks Matt.

Rick,

  I have only been into this hobby for about 7 mos, so I am just a noob. BUT, the best lesson I have learned, the hard way, is that I have the rest of my life to do this hobby.  What's your rush? After tearing apart my first layout I am now redoing it to see what I like and don't like; what I have space for and what I don't; what I really want, and what is just a passing fancy. 

  With all the space you have, maybe starting out with only a portion and then working from there? or set up two different track plans each representing different interest and seeing how to bring them together?  There is no award for completing your layout other than self gratification.

  I purposely slow myself down. I now only buy one train at a time (meaning I set a goal and then do not buy anything else until that whole train is completed). I just spent two monthes putting my B&O A-B-A together and will probably take another 4 mos getting all four matching B&O passenger cars, before I even make a move to start purchasing a whole other consist of a train.

  Just my two cents. Hope it helps.  I know that any move I make is now something that I am happy with since I forced myself to take so much time to ensure it was the move I really really wanted to make.

SeaB

OK,

Picture this in the minds eye: A folded 0-72 dog bone layout, half of it with Atlas "O" and the other half Lionel. The Atlas half nicely detailed while the Lionel half features a lot of Lionel accessories. How impractical would this be?

Rick

Ted,

WOW, now that describes track in way that can be understood. What do I want? Both...tubular rail and a scale look. But not by asking tubular to look like scale. I know that is not doable.......that being said, here is a photo from the PennWestern Railroad.

If Tubular rail were substituted here...how would this scene look?

Rick

Rick

It would look like a beautifully scenicked model railroad with toy train track.

Are you thinking O-31 type track?  Are you thinking about adding extra ties or just having 3 ties per 10 inch section of track?

Something else to consider if you go with traditional tubular track.  The gentle curves in that scene go away since there are no tubular curves available over O-72.

Here is a photo from Max Warfel.  It is a good representation of what you can do with tubular track but you would loose a lot visually and design wise compared to the Gargraves used above.

Thanks Ted,

I think this looks just fine. I have 0-72 down to 0-31. And 0-54 Atlas O. The point of all this is; I already have the track....

I think the tubular rail, oversize couplers, mixed sized cars and the third rail are what makes "O Gauge" trains!

Now, let's see more scenes of tubular rail, detailed or toy setting!

Many Thanks.

Rick.

Now that's something I can help with. My layout is just mostly loops, but what I did to make it interesting is to make sure that the loops did not run the whole way around with each other, and that they interacted with other things, such as the mountain and the yard that the mainline runs right through the middle of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...=channel&list=UL