What If You Did The Whole Thing Over?

I'd probably use different switch machines.

If just the same space was available I would not change the track plan. I would make the layout four feet high and do a much better job with the wiring.  

Once again Arnold, you have come up with a great topic, though the discussion is nothing new.  I think calling yourself out right off the bat is what makes your topics so good.

I'm in the process of building now.  I have put grades in all my layouts, but they were N and HO scales.  I am getting the grades built, but I have been having a harder time building the carpentry than when I was much younger.  I hope wiring doesn't prove to be as challenging.  For pete's sake, I worked in electronics for 43 years.

If I could have a layout room larger than 11x11, that would be my desire.  Trying to squeeze a mountain railroad that has some operating potential into that space has been a challenge.

Well, the one I have is the result of such a do-over.  the previous one had beautiful, sinuous corves and a dramatic grade:  too sinuous and too dramatic for some of my engines and long trains, especially the varnish.  So the new layout only has a grade on the NG line, and the 3RO simulates interesting topography with a tunnel, cuts, and bridges over rivers.

Now, if I had to do it all over today?  I really would have to wish for the do-over to begin not with construction of my layout but with the trains I got for Christmas as a boy.  I have far too much emotional investment in them to abandon 3RO as my primary scale.  But part of me wants 2RO.  Another part of me wants Standard/Wide Gauge--oh! is *that* ever a seductive desire!! 

I guess the place to start over is with a bigger train room, which would mean a bigger house, which would mean more money, which would mean . . . .

Aww, I'll just stick with what I have ;-)

The next layout will have a large passenger station with the ability to have 4-6 passenger trains ready to leave and a much larger freight yard with the ability to build and tear down consists. Also I will replace all my FastTrack crap with better stuff - it has been disappointing.

Arnold.

Warrenville began in 1983 so, I guess that it should be well established, but it has been, and will forever be (I hope), evolving.

The biggest mistake I made, which was a **** of a job to rectify, was using O27 curves and switches. At the time I didn't know that wider radii curves and switches for O27 track existed. The disruption to everything to replace these curves with O42, O54 and O72, and switches with O42, was crazy to say the least. Thank the train gods that Warrenville was much smaller at the time. All expansions thereafter were made with wider radii track.

The next largest mistake was too many switches connecting separate "loops". I quickly learned that I like long runs and long trains. Again, disruption to large parts of ballasted trackwork and scenery was  needed to smoothly combine loops into nice long runs.

Lastly, squeezing every postwar operating accessory, with abandon where ever they would fit, even if I could not reach them, was another mistake. Since rectified (again with a lot of layout disruption) by having less of them on the layout and those that remained placed where they could be reached and in logical industry order (ie, log loaders near the sawmill, barrel loaders near factories, horse corral near the farm, etc.).

So, to answer your question, I would avoid all of these mistakes were I ever to build a new layout.

The good to all of the above? I love working on the layout. Note in my first statement above that I hope that Warrenville will forever continue to evolve

Well I like my layout as is. Good enough.

 if I had the opportunity I would have it in a different location like upstairs in a sunny warm room. A  Location do over.

or placed possibly in a finished basement with temperature control, where I would place the current layout in one side and have a two rail scale switching layout in the opposite  side. As for a layout do over? Possibly add the live catenary on a surrounding 054 loop of surrounding track with a passing siding.  And add a second simplistic elevated line to what I currently have.

A different basement configuration which incorporates the train room with the shop.  Then I could run a train from the workbench to the layout.

Modular or modular like layout that could be completed in small chunks.  Moved, added, deleted areas.

No grades.  Track level, terrain around train can go up or down.

Three loops where one loop acts as the staging area, yard lead, storage, passing etc.  Just a catch all track that is not expected to run trains in a continuous loop all the time.

No scaletrax.  If you want to know why, just search scaletrax and ron045.  You'll find a complaint or two.

Minimum O-8X curves.

Longer passenger yard and freight yards.  

Stick with one size of engine or cars i.e. scale or semiscale.  Maybe semiscale.

Incorporate a timesaver or shunting puzzle.

Better planning for non track plan part of layout.

That's enough for now.  Could probably list more.

I would tear down and start new tomorrow, but we are talking about moving in 2-5 years.  I'll just keep going with what I have for now.

Have fun!  Good thread Arnold. 

Ron

My intentions for a do-over:

Do-over #1:
My L-shaped layout has O42 curves and switches, which was the maximum curvature I could fit into an L-shaped room. Those curves and switches are well suited to THOMAS series trains for my great grandsons and smaller locos, but grandpa's "showpiece" trains require O72 curves. So my first do-over would be to abandon perimeter aisles and build 6-1/2 feet wide platforms as an around-the-wall layout. That space-optimizing adjustment would accommodate O72 curves and switches for my to-scale locos -- which are now mounted on display shelves because they can't be run on the existing layout.

Do-over #2:
My existing layout has an upper level with Dept 56 Christmas pieces and three separate Christmas-decor trolley lines. I'd keep those items, but add a subway line underneath the main level for another "gee whiz" feature. To see it in action, I'd build the main platform with "cookie cutter" method (not a plywood platform), to provide viewing portals for subway cars in motion.

Do-over #3:
Before starting over, I'd change the existing florescent ceiling fixtures to track-type lighting with incandescent bulbs on a dimmer-controlled circuit. The "can lights" on the ceiling track strips could be pointed to highlight areas of special interest. 

I'm now 81, so the likelihood of doing these do-overs is .... slim to none; unless my doctor could arrange my living to 100 in good health!

Mike Mottler     LCCA 12394
mottlermike10@gmail.com

"if you started from scratch and did the whole thing over again..."

Well, since we are dreaming, give me a "time machine" and send this lad back to 1954 or somewhere near, that would be a great time and place to start over.

enjoy your toy trains...

I have't even finished my layout, but would (somehow?) modify the plan so it's not a NASCAR track. Once on the track, all trains turn left (or right if turned around). I did put in a Y so they can turn around.

1- maximum table width 2 feet except for return loops

2- NO lift out section

3- more scenery, less track

JohnA

Very interesting replies, every single one of them.

Thank you for the compliments about coming up with the idea for the thread. It should be helpful to all those considering making substantial changes to an existing well-established layout, as well as building a new, or even a first, layout.

It's great to be able to learn from each other. Arnold

If I had the opportunity to do it all over again, I think I woukd focus more on the tinplate and clockwork side of things. I love the shiny, flashy lithography and roundy-rounds that is common with that style of running.

Who knows, that might just happen yet. I'm still flip-flopping on the stuff I have here. Also, as others have said, more scenery, less rail is a good thing too. 

Thank you Arnold, and everyone, this is helpful with planning my new layout.

I'd begin at the beginning.

When I built my layout, the first O gauge, and first in 30+ years, I knew it would not be my last. So out would go the 027 track and curves and 5121-2 series switches. Gargraves, Ross, atlas, would be my preferred track and turnout choices. No fasttrack.

Larger curves- I can fit up to 054 in my current space......

Wait- I forgot the most important part TAKE OVER MORE SPACE IN THE BASEMENT!

I have found that I like operating and switching, building and breaking down trains and delivering "loads" to "customers" in my little world (to paraphrase Arnold). But sometimes I want to just turn on a train and let it run while enjoying a nice single-malt.

I would do a lift out or lift bridge if the plan required. A proper track to scenery balance, remembering it's a TRAIN layout, not a Scenery layout. I like building scenery but running trains is what it's all about.

Finally add digital controls, likely DCS which will run both Lionel and MTH trains since I have many of both.

Bob

Two things:

1 Battery power with hand held controller from day one.  The larger one's layout is the more important on board battery R/C becomes.

2 Start my present layout years earlier.

I would concentrate more on tinplate and postwar toy-like stuff.  Would use the money I spent on expensive O engines to instead build small portable layouts in smaller scales.

Great topic, Arnold!  Capturing lessons learned is a huge part of improving what we do.  Panhandle 1 was my first stab at a permanent layout.  Most of the lessons learned are noted in the early pages of the Panhandle 2 thread.  Briefly, the really big ones are:

• Put the backdrop in first, before building the bench work.
• Grades are a major PITA.  You truly need a giant space to effectively use grades and employ helpers in O.
• Resist the temptation to cram more things into the layout.  Less (done well) is more.
• No rushed construction or band-aids just to get trains running.  You always pay for these bad decisions later.
• Put the emphasis on reliability.  There's no fun in repeatedly fixing problems or limping along.
• Design in accessibility to the layout;  it's difficult to add later.  You will need to reach that switch in the corner!

But even now with the new layout under construction, there are a few items I would change or consider changing.

1. At 47' x 11', Panhandle 2 is a bit narrow.  I would love to have another 4-6 feet of depth for aisle space and seating.
2. I would seriously consider using Atlas O track rather than GarGraves. 

George

I have two layouts in my basement. Both are finished and were the subject of articles in OGR magazine. The 12’-by-8’ layout was built between 1999 and 2004 and has three independent loops of O-72, O-54 and O-36. The 10’-by-5’ layout was built between 2014 and 2019, after I had retired, and has just a single O-54 loop. It was built for easy disassembly so that it could be moved if necessary. Since the track plans are simple, both layouts run by conventional control.

In both cases, the first thing I did was to decide on how much space I wanted to devote to the layout. I could have made the layouts bigger than I did, but I did not want either one to fill the basement or to take many years to complete. I was very deliberate when building the layouts and planned everything carefully. Therefore, given the space constraints that I accepted in the beginning, I’m satisfied with both, especially the smaller one. The result is that I now have two completed layouts and nothing else to do on either one. I’ve been downstairs for hours this week trying to find something to upgrade but there’s nothing that seems like a possibility. So, the layouts are not providing modeling activity for me, which is not good, because my favorite parts of the hobby are building structures and scenery. All I can do is run trains.

The smaller layout was built with two stub tracks and could easily be expanded, but I still don’t want to use additional floor space in the basement. The larger layout and its track plan were not built with any plan for expansion and would require lots of track and scenery revision to expand.

So, I wouldn’t do anything different on the smaller layout. It’s the best that I could have done in a 10’-by-5’ space. For the 12’-by-8’ layout, I would make it larger and use an around-the-wall arrangement rather than a tabletop style, possibly with an elevated inner loop. The main level would be O-72 with a reverse loop. In hindsight, it might have been better to build larger layouts in the first place.

MELGAR

Arnold, this is a great Question, the element of Age changes everything, technology has come so far, prices of all the necessary components have escalated to almost impossible affordability, (if ones on a fixed budget) so, I count my lucky stars that I have the layout I have, I’m happy. Great Question, how do you turn back Time. Thank You, it’s a really fun hobby. Happy Railroading Everyone 

Actually, I wouldn't change a thing. This is my dream layout, the first thing on my bucket list and the one that I planned to last the rest of my life. It's small (4'x12'), two loops (042 & 031 - big enough for every engine I own), has all my postwar accessories in logical locations (an area each for industrial, engine service, and stations) with buttons at the table edge, the wiring is exposed on top of the table work, plenty of power (the MTH Z4000 with the original, simple throttle and whistle/horn hand-held - no longer made, more's the pity), and it's no higher than my kitchen table with plenty of room under for storage. Plus, I built it on casters so it can pushed out of the way should I drop something that rolls under it. The only thing it lacks is scenery (other than the green indoor/outdoor carpet with roadbed painted on it) and I have a vintage sheet of "Mountain Paper" that'll take care of that "one of these days".

I guess I'm pretty lucky. 

RE: your original question "What would you do if you started from scratch and did the whole thing all over again?"

I do - EVERY YEAR!  I enjoy having a 2 month of the year Christmas layout, plus the 6 weeks to put it up and the 4 weeks to clean and take it down.  I change every aspect of it every year.  I don't have enough scenery options to create new scenes every year, but I do have enough that I can rotate what I do use.

So that's what I would do if I started from scratch!

I know that's not the intent of your thread but just felt like jumping in anyways!  Good topic

- walt

No regrets here, wouldn't change a thing.

Here's something for a little comic relief. Do you think I should have better wiring on my do-over layout?

That was the way the wiring was for 25 years, and the trains ran fine by some miracle without any short circuits because of the wiring.

I substantially improved it a few months ago by adding heavy duty Atlas O Scale connectors and cleaning it up a little, as shown below:

Still no problems, but the wiring, of course, could still be improved.

I've seen model railroad wiring that looks like a utility company like Con Edison did it because it's so well organized and masterfully done. I suspect many of you folks have such wiring.  Arnold

In some cases, the work to do it over is so intimidating that the decision ends up just to keep it as is. The benefits from the remake may not be worth the time, effort and cost unless the original layout is really deficient. Is it possible that the redo is more work than building the original layout? Apparently, careful planning and construction are essential the first time...

MELGAR

I certainly over engineered the old layout. I built it out of 2x4’s, construction board, insulation foam and enough screws and wood glue that it would have served as a tornado shelter.

I’m a big believer in trying to stick to only one or two railroads. (UP and SP for me.) Alas the occasional “But what about” has left me with things I shouldn’t have bought but that I dearly love (Pennsylvania T-1) or that my son remembers (N&W J) fondly. I would probably be a bit more ruthless in that regard and it would have been better for me.

Wire the crap out of it. Drop, drop, drop. Seriously. Drill holes and drop a line. Star wire the crap out of it.

Have a good sense of humor about the mistakes you will make.  I would agonize over getting the layout level in a way that was a colossal waste of time. If it looks good at arms length, you’re fine. If you’re six inches away from the problem then YOU are the problem.

I shared my track plan here one time and the negative feedback at the time soured me. I knew it wasn’t great but when I posted the track plan it wasn’t long until someone made sure to say it looked like a racetrack. (Thanks Tom) I would say this:  A.) it was my first layout, B.) I was building it for both myself and my then toddler son, and C.) I needed to make mistakes and learn from them. People forget that Norm’s first layout was a tinplate track 4x8(?) in his apartment, but don’t let people tear you down when you’re first learning to walk.

There are a lot of great people in a hobby. Some are miles ahead of you in ability, others are miles behind you. Read twice as much as you post, pay attention and when you’re stuck just ask for help.

The nitwits, which every hobby has, shouldn’t be a consideration when you build your layout. Make yourself happy first and if other people like it then that’s great.

Dear sweet baby Jesus just leave the aquarium gravel on the shelf. Seriously. Just say no.

@Yojimbo, I fondly remember your posts from the earliest days of the Forum. It's nice to see you posting again. I agree that some folks want to over-think and over-engineer their layout. Not necessary!  And before I forget, do you still have the Lionel Nuclear Reactor that dispenses Red Hots candy? 

John

Hi John,

Thanks for the kind words. I remember those early years very fondly.

I still have my Reactor! Very sharp memory on your part. Well played.

Best,

Jim

I think everyone should post photos too.

I'll start. 

Bob

About wiring a layout ... to Arnold C.

The best layout wiring I've seen is the layout designed and built by the LONE STAR TRAIN CLUB in Houston. Apparently many of their members work in the aerospace industry, because their nicely-dressed wiring runs seem to be echoes of the patterns used in the space program: color coded, numbered wires, neat attachments. No "explosion in a spaghetti factory" look! I borrowed many of their techniques, albeit not as perfectly implemented.

However, since electricity is no respecter of "ship shape" wiring paths, any wiring routes that work are acceptable to the electrons. Thank goodness!

Mike Mottler     LCCA 12394
mottlermike10@gmail.com

Thanks to Kanawha, I was able to incorporate a bucket list of features into my track work: Double Cross-over, Double Reversing Loops, Wye, 24' passing siding, 12' yard lead, passenger station siding, 6 track engine service yard with in/out, super elevated curves. 

I have two mainlines. It would been nice to have had three.  The yard doesn't have a run-around track. Always can use another siding or ten. No turntable. 

My only real regret is I wish I had started earlier.

Gilly

My present layout is a 10'x12' around-the-room, two-level layout in a 10'x12' room (Mianne benchwork).  I like it & I'm completely happy with it ... it's my fourth major layout over the past 40 years.  It has one 072 loop plus several other 054 - 042 loops, a modified "Timesaver" yard on the second deck, plus Halloween and Space Fantasy Mountains incorporated in the layout. It's operational, "kinda" realistic (except for the "Mountains" part), heavy on Lionel accessories and Atlas track, and pretty much fun (at least when the DZ-1000s are working with my Atlas track).

HOWEVER, if I could, I WOULD start over by buying a 4800 sq.ft. house in some attractive part of the country for $300,000 (or so) that had a room (or basement - say, what's that???) of at least 900 sq.ft. for my "new" layout.  Around here, that house is at least twenty times $300k.

Then, I would really get to work.  

@rthomps posted:

HOWEVER, if I could, I WOULD start over by buying a 4800 sq.ft. house in some attractive part of the country for $300,000 (or so) that had a room (or basement - say, what's that???) of at least 900 sq.ft. for my "new" layout.  Around here, that house is at least twenty times $300k.

Then, I would really get to work.  

In business they say...

On time, within scope, on budget... Pick only 2.

Same goes with your "desire"...

4800 sq ft house, $300K, attractive part of the country... Pick only 2.

I am now on my eighth permanent layout so you could say I have done it over seven times. Based on the available space I have, I must say I am extremely happy with my layout and although it will never be finished, I really enjoy running trains on it.  The only thing I would like to change is to have more energy to continue improvements but at 74, I am not sure I have much control over that!

Happy railroading,

Don

Unless my house got bigger i would do it again.

@DGJONES posted:

I am now on my eighth permanent layout so you could say I have done it over seven times. Based on the available space I have, I must say I am extremely happy with my layout and although it will never be finished, I really enjoy running trains on it.  The only thing I would like to change is to have more energy to continue improvements but at 74, I am not sure I have much control over that!

Happy railroading,

Don

Come on guy - at 74 = by today's standards = you are a semi-spring chicken!

Well, I did the whole thing over at least 3 times and each time things got better. My chronicles are outlined in Run 255 and last month's magazine Run 313. The only thing I would change with my new layout is NOT USING DZ2500 switch motors. I really do not like the things at all. No need to bash them as I could write a book on my issues. I should have used Tortoise. I do have (1) partially hidden switch on the lower level that most likely will give me problems in the future but I will deal with that when it happens. I did plan for maintenance during construction but access is tight.

Donald  

I would ignore conventional control and motive power and do all TMCC/Legacy/Lionchief Plus. Easy enough to do after the fact, but I spent a lot of time wiring blocks, cab control, switch machines etc. etc. ALL command control for me!