Too much track??

I may attached the wrong attachment in the original post. Try this one. 

Your modeling interests are similar to mine. I am now completing a 10'-by-5' single-track O-gauge branchline railroad. It is just an O-54 oval of Atlas track which includes a river valley, truss bridge, trestle, tunnel/hill, and downtown. I run mostly small steam engines and early diesels typical of 1920s to 1950s New England. When I started this layout in 2014, I had considered making it On30 but decided to stay with O gauge because I have many 3-rail scale-sized locomotives and rolling stock. Now that the layout is almost complete, I'm considering a small On30 layout as my next project. An article about the branchline railroad is scheduled to appear in O-Gauge Railroading magazine Run 304 so I'm not posting new pictures right now. You can contact me by e-mail.

MELGAR

Congratulations on being in the magazine! 

Any chance you could post a picture of your layout diagram by saving it as a picture file from your software program?  Many more would be able to comment, if you do.

Chuck

I'll try to do that. Thanks for pointing that out. 

Jeffrey

Yes, I could not open your file either.

279 pieces of track is not too much in a 35'x 37' space.

I played with the some 3D work the best that I could. Desert table. Added some extrusions to give perception for the walls. Track and everything is still indexed to O" height.

The file is attached.

Jeffrey, Seeing Carl's captures, puts the layout plan into perspective for me.  For that space, I think it is just about right.  A tweek here or there by folks who have a better eye than me, and some more tweeks while building, and I think you will have an interesting layout with many scenic and industrial possibilities.

I tried On30 as a step to larger trains and structures from the HO I had modeled for years.  This was just of a couple of modules, and no scenery, just a few O scale buildings.  The On30 trains by Bachmanm run and look great, but I decided I didn't want the slow pace of narrow gauge.  A full size branch line in the Appalachians is more to my liking.  I then found O gauge 3-rail, and knew that was what I wanted.  You can see my plan development on my topic that has a link in my signature line.  This is strictly my journey and what has suited me.  Your experience and interests will surely vary.

Again, I think you have a good plan from what I see on the captures.

Hi Confused Jeffrey,

Let's get you UN-confused.  First off, after looking at Mr. Moonman's 3D renderings, I think it is a darned decent layout with plenty of opportunities for operation or just plain running, based on whatever mood you're in at the time.  Also, I wouldn't really consider the trackage as bowl of spaghetti, although I can see where you might think that.  That's what gives it extra route capabilities without mind-bending dispatching headaches that come along with true "bowl of spaghetti" type of plans.  Nothing wrong with avoiding headaches.

I REALLY like your idea of sticking with standard 3-rail trains.  Just like you say, small O-gauge steam with ready-to-go sound is easily available, and still would look great with a Colorado-themed layout.  Being in the Rockies doesn't automatically mean you have to do narrow gauge.  Although the Rockies are well known for narrow gauge railroads, there was some standard gauge, too.  A lot of people either forget that, or are totally unaware of it to start with.  Heck, even small, first generation diesels (i.e., NW-2's, GP7's, etc.) would look terrific on your layout and still fit within your time frame.  I whole-heartedly agree with the "ease" factor, because that's the way I would go about it, too.

Simple and easy.  That's the only way to run a railroad! 

Hope you're UN-confused now! 

FWIW: By the late 1880s on, the Colorado narrow gauges that were truly essential, and in proximity to competing lines that were standard gauge, began to be standard gauged.  Their hand was forced, to a degree, by the Colorado Midland, which commenced building standard gauge into the Rockies in 1886 (as I recall).

SO... you don't HAVE to be narrow gauge to model Colorado. I intend to do it in HO standard gauge, circa late 1880s.

Best of luck!

Andre

First off-- many thanks to MoonMan for the 3D renderings. What you did quickly would have taken me hours. It has even helped me better visualize what I have planned. 

Mixed Freight-- thank you for your positive comments regarding the track plan, (along with Mark's) . I may have some reach issues, but I'll just have to solve those problems as I lay the track. I have been involved in model railroading since I was a teenager, and made some half hearten attempts at an HO layout , and attempted once again in my 20's-- this time in HOn3, (still have the Shinohara track and switches) but children and work took precedence, so that never really got anywhere. So-- here I am 40 years later-- maybe third time is the charm. I have a pile of stuff, including the track and switches, so I am committed to following through this time around. We have an 11 year old grandson who stays with us quite a bit-- and I am hoping he get's the bug too... 

Mr. Boyce-- your observations about having transitioned through On30 on your way to O scale were very helpful.  I am in the process of reading your layout building topic (at work...but I am sort of self employed-- so not stealing from anyone...)  and I already see we have common interests in small engines and equipment. Also-- I think that the mountains here in the east with all the greenery, and KUDZU, look nice when modeled. 

Andre-- You are exactly correct about how there were many standard gauge routes through the Rockies. I have a 366 page book "Colorado Midland Railway-- Daylight through the divide" by Dan Abbott, and it chronicles the trials and tribulations of trying to cross the Rockies. Cass in WV is another example of standard gauge mountain railroading. 

I just need to get up off my butt and get to work!

Jeffrey-- now with laser focus!

P.S. That round thing in the drawing is a natural gas water heater, and I have relocated it to the other side of that 12 inch block wall. NOT an easy task. But it is out of the way now.  

Jeffrey, Thank you.  I'm glad my comments were helpful.  You certainly need a lot of trees, bushes, and undergrowth to model this part of the country, but you are right, I have seen kudzu modeled to good effect.  We don't have it as far north as I am, but I know farther south it grows like mad.

I'm glad you are reading through my planning topic.  The interaction of many people and seeing many ideas develop has always been of great interest to me as I follow along a topic like that, or read through one to catch up if I wasn't there near the beginning.  If you would like anything clarified, or if you have a comment or suggestion, please don't hesitate to respond.  I hope to be picking up the build in the bigger room right after Christmas, so there should be a lot more to come.

Jeff.

Looks pretty good to me.

If you had any reservations about to much track (and I don't think you should) build a Steel Mill !

Not as stupid as it sounds.

Have a mainline track like you have and convert most of the sidings to the Steel mill them lots of hoppers, gondolas, coil cars, Hot Metal and slag cars plus you can incorporate a common carrier on the mainline. Lots of opportunities.

I could see great possibilities the Blast furnace can be a flat or use a electric furnace or a Basic Oxygen furnace not hard to build.

I have done it and I even have a passenger service as well in a 29' X 29' room.

Go for it mate!

Roo. 

Mark; Still reading your build thread-- but as you said-- in the counsel of many elders is wisdom-- and sometimes you are reading about one topic-- and you pick up some info on another topic that you never expected.  

Roo;  I like heavy industry-- particularly coal mining (we have a few shaft mines left within a 50 mile radius of me...) and doing a steel mill would be another opportunity to learn something about that. We have a retired steel mill in Birmingham Alabama that you can take a tour of-- and this would prompt me to take the time to go do that. Thanks for that suggestion!