Looking for feedback on a track plan

Working on my first ever layout and I'm looking for feedback on the track plan. I'm looking for basic operational interest, but more so interested in scenery. Let me know what you think.

 

Looks like you have plenty of room for scenery. What kind of scenery are you wanting to do?

You might consider adding another spur to the passing track at the bottom of your drawing to give space for an industry. Just a suggestion.

Joe

 

The left side will feature a river with some bluffs above rising to a large wooded hill. There will be a quarry serviced by the next section of track in a small valley. Another hill rise to the left and below this. It will be heavily wooded as well with a logger camp. The passing track on the bottom will have a passenger depot. The passing on the will be a team track for a small industrial area. And the spur coming from the top will service a cement factory. Most the right portion of the right will be a small town business district and I'll have a smaller town kind of in the upper left. I'm thinking a general store and a couple other small buildings.

 

If I'm reading this right, the layout measures 6x8? If so, it will be difficult to reach the middle of the layout. A good rule of thumb is no more than 2 feet of layout space from any accessible edge. Also at the top of the picture, it looks like the tracks cross each other in a couple spots, I'm not sure how that's suppose to work?

 

Thanks for the feedback. I hadn't thought about reaching the middle of the layout. Regarding the overlapping track. The inner track will be elevated and will go over the branches the extend into the middle.

 

While this looks like a good idea on paper, I don't think you have enough distance to gain the necessary height to clear those spurs.

 

Ethan is right. You need 3-1/2 to 4 inches of clearance to elevate one level of track over another. As your design currently exists the grade to gain that much elevation would be much too steep. Also, before yo start cutting up plywood, you should think about a couple of things. ONE is, when you enter the layout space, what is it you want to see? This might seem like a silly question, but it will become more relevant as you go forward. The question is, what do you want this railroad to do? If its to provide a space to run trains, that's one thing. If you are looking for a layout that provides for realistic operation, that's another. If you had a 40x30-foot space, the question can be moot, but in a smaller space, the questions deserve some thought. Other than that, it's your layout and if it makes you happy, build it the way yo want it.

GS

 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

3.5 - 4 inches of clearance is more than I expected. Measuring the rolling stock I am using it seemed that 2.5 would be sufficient, but I guess I should be figuring more and making some adjustments.

 

4" I think is "standard", although 3.5" would probably work. It's important to consider the thickness of the track and roadbed its self when measuring.
If you're running short trains with properly weighted locomotives, you can go as much as a 4% grade, but 2% or less will lead to much better operations. 4" of raise at 4% takes 8 feet of run, and 4" of rise at 2% takes 16 feet of run.
Woodland Scenics makes some nice premade incline sets in 2%, 3% and 4% sizes.

 

Thanks again for the input. I've certainly have some things to think about and improve.

 

That's a great point, Keith. As I look around the space that I have I could probably do some more rearranging. I'm doing it in my basement that also serves as a spare bedroom, some storage and my office (I work from home). I could do a bit of rearranging an give myself a lot more space and go with an L or U shaped layout. I could get a space of about 96" by 91". There is a window along the 96". The window is 48" wide, 34" from the floor and about 11" from the corner. I'm gonna do some playing around in my layout program and come up with something that might work better. BTW I'm working in HO.

 

ONE is, when you enter the layout space, what is it you want to see? This might seem like a silly question, but it will become more relevant as you go forward.

What this means (and the idea is not original to me. I think Tony Koester said it some years ago in an article in the old RMC) is that every project, whether it's restoring an old car or building a new layout, begins with a VISION of how you want your project to turn out, or, put another way, what's in your mind's eye when you start out? It is that vision that inspires your work and keeps you from making so many compromises that you end up with something so generic that it could represent any railroad, any place, any time. If that's what you want to see when you enter your layout space, well and good, but if your point of inspiration is, say, the Missouri Pacific line along the Missouri River between Washington and Jefferson City or the Frisco between Monett and Fort Smith, then do your best to replicate scenes from those areas. Otherwise, eventually, you will become dissatisfied and blow up the layout. The example Tony Koester used was that he had built a pretty big layout reflecting railroading in the Appalachians, in large part because he wanted to be part of an imaginary "Alphabet Route" in conjunction with Allen McClelland's V&O. He finally became dissatisfied with it because his real love was the Nickel Plate Road across Indiana. In other words, the earlier railroad was not what he wanted to see.

GS

 

Ah yes, this makes sense to me. My vision at this point is the Frisco between Springfield and Willow Springs. Springfield would be pared down a bit due to space allowance, but really the vision is for landscape is that area. I plan to have a large town with industry and passenger service going out to a smaller town with some freight service. My primary industries would be cement and aggregate, logging and grain/feed, but with some smaller industry including in a team track. This town would also have a small business/shopping district. This larger town would take up about 1/3 to 1/2 of the layout. The rest of the layout would be more rural. Like I said a smaller town, a general store, and couple other small buildings, maybe a small passenger depot and some small houses. There would also be a small quarry and logging camp somewhere in the layout, perhaps serviced by the same spur. There would also be a river maybe some small streams and springs, etc.

I'm working on a walk in layout now. I think I can make better use of the space I have that way rather than as island 6'x8'.

 

I'll throw in my three layout building threads. The first two, I'm trying to figure out an "around the walls" design for a bed room. The third, I'm working with a larger room and struggling to figure out a prototype design that I would be happy with. I think it's interesting to see the progression in the designs as I go. In both cases, it took me several tries to come up with the first plan I actually tried because I was working with a much larger space than I previously had.
http://frisco.org/shipit/index.php?threads/layout-plans.11490/#post-71584
http://frisco.org/shipit/index.php?threads/rebuilding-the-iantha-branch.11628/
http://frisco.org/shipit/index.php?threads/rebuilding-the-iantha-branch-again.12577/

 

Another item of interest I don't think I've seen discussed yet: layout height.

I think most people recommend something between upper chest and eye level for the best viewing angles. The problem with that is you have to stand the whole time if you want to operate. I have chronic pain in both feet, so I built my current level at a height that I can sit in an office chair at it like a computer desk . I personally love this approach because it allows me to enjoy operating again because I don't have to be on my feet all the time.

 

Taking some of your suggestions here is a total revision. Let me know what you think.

 

@dboone74 ,

Here are some examples that I provided to Ethan a while back:

Looks like a great project. I looked through a few of my books and have a couple of suggestions for inspiration

1) Asphodel and Southern by Iain Rice. Appears in the "Compact Layout Design" book by Kalmbach Hobby. This plan's main loop is about 8' X 9' and I am sure you could adapt structures to a late 70s location and leave out the turntable. It has a similar removable section, and is mostly less than 2ft wide around the walls. I can loan you the book if you cannot find the plan online, or I could draw it up in AnyRail.

2.) Ouachita & Ozark in in "101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders", also a Kalmbach book. This plan has a two-railroad theme and follows a ~1ft shelf around the walls. I think the main loop could be adapted, but the removable section would be wider. Again, I can loan you the book if you like.

3.) Adapt the Heart of Georgia Track plan to your space, adding the removable segment:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OWJKbUUCx...600-h/Heart+of+Georgia+HOG+Layout+Rev+511.jpg

4.) There is a Frisco-themed plan at:

http://www.trainboard.com/highball/index.php?threads/room-sized-ho-scale-shelf-layout.51788/

That might meet Jim's recommendation. It shows two towns in Kansas, and you might shrink it by about a foot to fit. Might have to remove one industry.

5.) The 9 X 13 Coloma Line that appeared in Model Railroader might be adapted to your space. You could cut out the WYE and save some length:

http://mrr.trains.com/how to/track plan database/2012/07/the coloma line

6.) Alagoma and Wolff Creek. A nice plan in the MRH forum, but might need to shrink a bit in length.

http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/16867

 

@dboone,

I am a fan of the narrow shelf style and think that the last redraw of the (6) plan above might suit your goals:

https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/16867?page=1

The town area in the lower left corner could roughly mimic what you have in the upper right of your plan. I have the book by Iain Rice on compact layout design, and I think I have a plan book from Lance Mindheim (sp?). Would be happy to loan them to you. Let me know.

-Bob T.