New to the hobby and looking for layout advice.

Hi Carl,

sorry for the late response I've been a little under the weather the last couple of days.

I will come up into the center of the layout when I enter the attic. When I mentioned a hatch in my previous post I meant for accessing the back portion of the loops. Not really a big deal, it's not something that's going to stop me, and if I have to climb over the top I'll just have to make sure I build the bench accordingly. 

Funny you should mention adjusting the deck height.  When I took my initial measurements I set up a stand at 30" put a box car on it and had about 2" clearance on top. I was all fat, dumb, and happy, until I realized I would probably one day have cars taller than a boxcar. I did have the car right up against the wall, and in the plan the outside track is 3.5"-4", from the wall. So I do need to reevaluate the deck height before I cut any lumber.

I've read the books by John Armstrong, and Tony Koester, recommended by the sponsor of this forum, as well as what I can gather from the internet on the operation of a model train layout. I'm also open to any recommendations. So I am trying to plan with a purpose in mind, as well as staging.  I'm just not sure how much space I'll need to accomplish it. For the most part my free space will be inside the loops, and the outside of the corners. I'll probably be able to fit a small siding to the left of the top loop, and another to the left of the room access, but I don't think either one of those can be much longer than 4'. 

I did play around with the MTS a little last night and actually had some fun with it. I was wondering if the train in MTS will derail if there is an issue with the track? 

Thanks again for your help.

RadCam posted:

Hello my name's Cameron,

as the title states I'm new to the hobby and I'm looking for a little layout advice. First the background, I'm interested in big steam 3 rail scale, 1930-1950ish. I would like to run a freight and passenger setup at the same time, while also working a switching yard, or loco service yard. I'm going to build this layout in my semi-finished attic. I have an 11.5' x 37' area That is mostly open with the exception of the vent pipes that run up through the roof, and the entry where the stairs come up through the floor. (Represented by the rectangles). I'm going to do an around the wall layout.  I plan on the benches being 36" wide for the most part. There are some areas where they will have to be less than that. I've been playing around with SCARM and think I've found a good starting point for what I can afford in track and switches. I know that right now it's not much more than loop running, but switches get expensive fast, and I want to see my trains run. It might also give me a chance to work on the various skills needed to lay track, switches, wiring etc. before I tackle a switch yard.

I'm going to be running MTH locomotives with DCS. I already have a challenger, and 4-8-4, as well as the DCS system. Yeah, I'm one of those guys that bought trains before I ever bought any track.

Thanks

Dear Cameron:

You do NOT need a double main-line if you are running DCS.  If you want to run two trains you could simple put them on one loop of track and regulate the speed.  Single track longs longer than double-track and gives you more room for scenery.  Saves some money too.  :-)

Your track arrangement is a good beginner's layout arrangement.  Down the road you may discover that you want to be more involved in your layout.  Your track arrangement is good for a "display" layout, but there are limited opportunities for people involvement.  

Too many folks deny themselves half the fun of the hobby but not including operations in their layouts.  I encourage people to consider the three essential and fundamental elements of a model railroad design: Plausibility, Purpose and Participation.  Participation--involvement is what lacks in too many layouts and provides the future fun and investment in a layout when its done.

The thing that strikes me the most about your situation is you are blessed with a huge amount of space and you could develop a fantastic operational design that could provide you with so very much more than a basic display arrangement.  However, I understand you are at the very start and learning.

I would respectfully suggest to you that for a future layout in that space to design your layout real world style in track arrangement and that is going point-to-point.  Actually make your train go from one place to the next, be turned, turntable, wye or reversing loop, and then return to your station of origination.  At both "ends" of your track, have a small yard or "fiddle area" to exchange rolling stock, swap loads and empties, change crews, etc.  Doing this will involve you and others much more than running a basic loop.  It is more fun to be part of the train crew vs. being an idle by-stander.

Your current arrangement could be slightly modified by eliminating the double-line main and have a single main and put in a couple of passing sidings.  Then as two people are operating a train, one would have to stop for the other as it was on a section of single main--very realistic set-up--real life.  In addition, sidings where cars could be picked-up and dropped-off would enhance your enjoyment and increase realism.  Again, this would involved direct interaction by you or someone else to pick-up or drop-off cars; making you or the other person an integral part of the layout.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT for future endeavors. 

Most people don't understand how to design a layout.  Most start off laying track and then try to figure out what they want to do later. That by far is the most common and repeated error in the history of model railroading--all scales. 

Figuring out your layout's overall design and then arranging the track to meet your design goals should come first.  Most folks learn that through the school of hard knocks.

Best wishes and good luck!  This is a fun hobby.  Doing it 45+ years now--multiple scales.  You are fortunate to be entering now as the DCS system makes operation incredibly simple compared to the old days when I entered.

RadCam posted:

Hi Carl,

sorry for the late response I've been a little under the weather the last couple of days.

I will come up into the center of the layout when I enter the attic. When I mentioned a hatch in my previous post I meant for accessing the back portion of the loops. Not really a big deal, it's not something that's going to stop me, and if I have to climb over the top I'll just have to make sure I build the bench accordingly. 

Funny you should mention adjusting the deck height.  When I took my initial measurements I set up a stand at 30" put a box car on it and had about 2" clearance on top. I was all fat, dumb, and happy, until I realized I would probably one day have cars taller than a boxcar. I did have the car right up against the wall, and in the plan the outside track is 3.5"-4", from the wall. So I do need to reevaluate the deck height before I cut any lumber.

I've read the books by John Armstrong, and Tony Koester, recommended by the sponsor of this forum, as well as what I can gather from the internet on the operation of a model train layout. I'm also open to any recommendations. So I am trying to plan with a purpose in mind, as well as staging.  I'm just not sure how much space I'll need to accomplish it. For the most part my free space will be inside the loops, and the outside of the corners. I'll probably be able to fit a small siding to the left of the top loop, and another to the left of the room access, but I don't think either one of those can be much longer than 4'. 

I did play around with the MTS a little last night and actually had some fun with it. I was wondering if the train in MTS will derail if there is an issue with the track? 

Thanks again for your help.

If it was a scale boxcar you should be ok. The autorack and a double-stack container are the only cars higher. if you have 7" from a 30" height at 3.5-4" from the wall it should be good.

The MTS train will stop or "derail" if there is a track joint that is not made in the software. It could be a place where you kinow you cut the track or wiggle it some to get a fit when you actually build. If that is the case, I make cut fits in the software for MTS running and rename the file "fit for sim" or something and keep the build file as is.

JOHN C, 

I have to say that I've watched many of your videos, and admire your layout.  I discovered your youtube channel when I was researching The Great Northern. Your input is appreciated, and if it wasn't for someone trying to jack my bank account I would have bought the track last week. I'm interested in what changes you would make because I am looking to build a "working" layout. I would like to be able to run three or four trains at a time.

My original thought with this design was to have the area inside the two loops represent a hub or transfer with one being for passengers, and the other freight. Maybe they are separated by a river, or canyon. I was thinking I could have a locomotive service area on the side with the passenger station so I have a reason to bring tank cars, freight etc. as well as remove empties back to the freight side. The freight side would be a classification yard with a rip track if I can fit it. To me the ovals represent the track in and out of the hub clockwise being eastbound.  I would start one train on the outside oval and work in while the other would start on the inside and work out. Being a gearhead one of the things that draws me to steam is all the moving bits and pieces, so I like watching them run. If a train leaves a terminal (passenger or freight) the next time it arrives it will be turned around simulating being turned around for its' return trip. And when I can afford more locomotives I would like to change out engines depending on the direction of travel.  None of this is set in stone, at least not until I buy the track, and I am very open to any suggestions you or anyone else may have to make this a better, more enjoyable layout. 

Carl,

the reason I asked about the MTS derailing is because I tried to get it to and couldn't. I had it cranked up to 22in/sec which is 60 smph if my flu muddled brain did the conversions right.

I would like to add that I now have a GE 44 ton in GN livery. I better buy some track soon or I wont have any money left. 

I would also like to say that I'm having a little trouble grasping the scale. I say that because after seeing the video of the very beautiful Empire Builder posted by another forum member I had to assemble my little teeny tiny Empire Builder and with just three coaches and an observation car the entire train is eight feet long which means the station platform should be about six feet long, but since I have really long straights my trains should really be longer to give them a more scale appearance, which in turn would mean a longer platform. Or am I looking at it all wrong?

Any help, advice or encouragement is greatly appreciated.

John C.

You are getting good advice from Carl -- that a layout should echo "real world" railroad operations.

The double crossover looks ultra cool, but two single crossovers in opposite paths (one at the top of the track plan and another at the bottom) would be cheaper and perhaps less likely to invite collisions. Passing sidings are also useful locations for operating accessories so that freight cars can load -- and later unload -- products off the main line. My favorite is the pair of Lionel Culvert accessories: the Unloader and the Loader. The Coal Ramp and accompanying Coal loader (if mounted underneath the ramp) catches coal when dumped and then reloads it onto a waiting coal hopper, thus creating a repeatable cycle of coal movement.

The passenger analog to this is to place a suburban depot in the boondocks along a route leading to the Big City Station.

Another previous suggestion called for realistic beginning and ending points on your railroad, as:
    * a coal mine and tipple producing hopper loads of coal for shipment to a coal-fired power plant
    * a dairy farm producing milk to be shipped in milk cans to a milk unloading platform adjacent to a dairy processing plant
    * an oil field with a derrick and a "horsehead" oil pump filling oil tank cars to be sent to an oil storage tank farm
    * a Fire House in town that responds to a burning house in the neighborhood (both are MTH action accessories)
    * a military base of quonset buildings served by a military train hauling tanks, trucks, a missile launcher, etc.
    * a river running through the layout creates a need for a train bridge across it -- Hellgate, Lift Bridge, Drawbridge, etc.

It's a space-eating feature, but a roundhouse, turntable, and access tracks makes a spectacular beginning/ending point for steam trains. A diesel shed could be placed in that area.

Industrial and residential buildings call for O-scale figures.  Artista makes a lot of realistic people to populate a layout. Send them a photo and they'll custom-make a figure of YOU.

Trouble is, one's imagination often outruns the available layout space! But carry on, regardless.

Mike Mottler
(ritrainguy)

No, the MTS in SCARM will not simulate physically caused derailments, such as excessive speed. I like the line from the Star Wars spoof, "ludicrous speed". A scale 60mph will be ok on O72 curves and up, but it will look way too fast.

The realization of the scale of 1:48 layouts is one that we all experience. Most layouts in O compromise or compress elements. You have the right idea, sizing a train and platform so that it appears correct, not necessarily to scale.

perhaps in your town, there isn't enough passenger demand. The crew knows this and stops with the designated cars in the proper position.

The peninsulas are the change direction features on the track plan. Place a passenger station in each of those. The train departs, makes a few long runs around the room and the changes back to inside track and enters a peninsula to drop passengers and collect new. Then, it departs in the opposite direction, runs some laps and does the same on the other side. Manage the freight traffic accordingly.

You have enough space to add in sidings for operational needs.

The collaboration of ideas to get you to this point has provided a "Backbone". You can study real railroad operations to get ideas or just make-up scenarios that you like. Then, add the required passing siding(s) or spurs. This is the operational part of designing a layout that adds the play value to suit you.

Running two trains on this track plan in simulation and then viewing the elapsed time will provide some guidance on how long a run session will last.

Developing this fine tuning is very personal. I would recommend that you build this and find what is lacking. Many of us could add elements of operation from our experience. That may not be what you will like when you actually get into some run sessions.

Building this will be a task that you will be able to accomplish and still have fun with it. There is plenty to be done to make this a reality.

Thanks Carl, 

that helps me make better sense of the scale aspect of it. 

I didn't plan on running the real trains at the kind of speeds I was running in MTS.  I was just seeing if I could find issue with the layout. Even in MTS it looked like ludicrous speed. 

I completely understand what you are saying about the personal aspect of an operation. I guess I'll just have to play with it and find out what I actually enjoy doing.  I am attracted to things happening for a reason on a schedule. I can see all kinds of challenges, or games I can play out, but I won't know what will really float my boat until I put it in the ocean, so to speak.

Now all I have to do is buy some track, and switches. Oh and figure out the best way to do the bench work, how best to wire the track, how many power blocks, and how many districts, how to control the switches, (how am I going to wire that up?) how to signal the switch states (what, more wiring?), and do you think I have enough smoke fluid?

Honestly, I'm having a ball. I really enjoy the research, the history, the design process, the planning, and I expect I will find the actual laying down of track challenging, as well as very gratifying when successfully completed.