Layout Design Help Needed

[modelbob]

I'm working on a design for an HO scale layout in my garage.

Currently it consists of an old 30" x 8' module connected with benchwork around the walls of the room. The original plan was for a traditional (read BORING) around the wall oval. With about 50 feet of mainline running it would work, but I have to wonder if there aren't better options out there.

So, before I start designing and laying permanent track, I'm interested in what the rest of you would suggest.

I've attached a image of the space available. The green sqaures are where the current benchwork is. Brown is what I had planned on making staging and storage tracks as well as a duckunder.

The crosshatched area isn't available for use, the rest of the space shown is, though I do need reasonable access to the shelving.

So... Given those guidelines, what would YOU build?

[modelbob]

Here's another version of the space available, this one without the existing benchwork. The part shown has to stay, other than there really isn't any requirement to use what's there now...

[grumpybob]

Well Bob,

Since i am big into switching and back country, New England running, i probably would set up two main cities where the Large green areas are and have Yards set up for staging in each. since most of what I run is Single lines, I would establish smaller town areas throughout the layout with passing sidings for local work while a passenger or long haul freight can still run thru without too much trouble.

I believe the drop in section, would probably be a pass through for Passenger and long distance freight. Terain would be mountainous and tree lined.

But then again that is what i might do to it. :D

[CBCNSfan]

Gee really have to think about this one. One thing I'm not in favour of is the caboose chase. I guess what I like is a loop to loop configureation. Have to do some doodling by the squares to see if it could fit. You wouldn't need a duckunder if thee is enough room.
Question: Is the layout modules going to be accessable from the forbidden area?
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

> Is the layout modules going to be accessable from the forbidden area?

Yes, that's a walkway and in fact will be the main viewing area.

[CBCNSfan]

Yes, that's a walkway and in fact will be the main viewing area.
So in fact a gate or duckunder is really a must to keep viewers from the operating area.
What will be the planned minimum radius?
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

> So in fact a gate or duckunder is really a must
> to keep viewers from the operating area.

No, that's not a problem. This is home layout, there really won't be many "viewers" to speak of. But when somebody does visit, it's likely they'll view the layout from that area.

> What will be the planned minimum radius?

20 inches on the mainline, 18 on any branchlines I might create. The 20 inches allows for a 20 and 22 inch curve on double track and a loop will still (barely) fit in a 4 foot square.

[CBCNSfan]

The 20 inches allows for a 20 and 22 inch curve on double track and a loop will still (barely) fit in a 4 foot square.
Right, but if its a return loop you need another 4 feet to close the loop, ie. 4' X 8' for one end thats a fair piece of real estate. The work bench, can that be below railroad territory? What I'm thinking of is loops to loops with spurs and lots of switching, it might be possible.
Failing that, a point to point with a connector track or tracks across the gate for circle running
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

> The work bench, can that be below railroad territory?

At this point in time, anything is up for discussion, including "paving over" the whole thing for use as part of the railroad. Granted, that's not likely to happen, but it's at least open for consideration.

Meanwhile, I've come up with a few ideas of my own, including one fairly radical one that may just work. :) (I'm not going to say anything yet, since I don't want to influence your design.)

As for the loop to loop design, be aware that the new showpiece of the railroad is a PRR GG1, and the bigger the curves the happier it will be... (I'm a PRR fan and this is a gift from my son, so while I'm occasionally tempted to build an On30 logging line instead, that's not going to happen...)

[CBCNSfan]

Just an idea with return loops. The loops in fact are staging areas for traffic to the visable areas of the RR. Trackage across brown area is main line if you have room for a couple of tracks for set out and pick up it would be a good place to put them. from the left and right sides of the brown areas there would be tracks to the lower levels and to the towns or whateveron the upper level. The loops on the right will require a little more carefull fitting.
Don't know what you use the shelves for , but if it was me I'd do my best to make the whole thing layout territory :D
Recap three types of layouts
1 Switching 2 Point to Point 3 Loop to Loop with the above you can have all three in one layout, and with a track across the gate you can play chase the caboose :D

Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

I'll have to play around with your plan a bit more.

Meanwhile, here's what I've come up with so far...

The centerpiece of the layout is a large station, with loading tracks that are close to 8 feet long. Since an HO scale 80' passenger car is close to 1 foot long, this allows for 6 cars and a loco. That's a nice looking passenger train, much shorter and they won't look good.

[modelbob]

Here's a first attempt at what Willis was suggesting:

[modelbob]

So, here's my impressions so far... Willis' idea is definitely interesting. The layout would have some interesting possibilities.

Pros: The ability to have more than one level of track and a nice sweeping S curve in the upper right corner. That would look really nice.

Cons: Lots of fairly sharp curves. 22 inch radius max, while the other design allows wider radius, up to 24 or 26 even, along with easements. Scenery on this one would be a bit more difficult, as in most places you'd have four parallel tracks spaced fairly close together. (I only show one track, but it would be double track.)

I'm definitely going to give this one some more consideration...

[CBCNSfan]

Hmm at the time I was thinking about something like the drwg. below (sorry I'm not much of an artist with a mouse and I butchered your nice drwg.) but now we have some other points to re consider

Point 1 "the new showpiece of the railroad is a PRR GG1,"
Point 2 " The centerpiece of the layout is a large station,"

If the GG1 was kept to the upper level, point to point and switching it might work but how would you fit the centerpiece in. The first attempt drwg. appears to be continous folded loop with max 22R curves, and you should be able to join the centerpiece to it. What I'm wondering is how the GG1 and foot long passenger cars are going to look on those curves. Not to mention the duckunders :D ( I'm 70 and got a thing about duckunders :) )
Cheers Willis

[abcraghead]

I'll have to play around with your plan a bit more.

Meanwhile, here's what I've come up with so far...

The centerpiece of the layout is a large station, with loading tracks that are close to 8 feet long. Since an HO scale 80' passenger car is close to 1 foot long, this allows for 6 cars and a loco. That's a nice looking passenger train, much shorter and they won't look good.

Flip the station and the yard. Putting the station against the wall allows you to lengthen the tracks further.

Or, run the station peninsula diagonal more. More length, breaks monotony.

Convert the yard area into a coachyard.

Convert the switching area at the bottom into a freight terminal yard. (40' boxcars negotiate #4 ladders easily.)

Add a few bits of industrial tracks here and there where possible. Now you can just turn it on and watch the trains circulate, *or*...

You can operate it prototypically. Have big passenger trains come off the mainline, which can act as a "continuous loop staging" track for multiple passneger trains. Require them to stop and drop sleepers, pick up sleepers, await connections with other trains, and/or combined sections/split sections. Have as many changes to the train consist as possible, thus keeping the coachyard switcher quite busy. And don't forget mail trains and express cars.

You can also have transfers which appear from "staging" (just flip a switch and run them into the yard area) which have to be broken up to be delivered to industries along the terminal railroad, many of which may occupy street running. And don't forget the LCL train of boxcars which has to be made and broken up in the frieghthouse yard. All told you could easily have three or four jobs operating at once if required.

[modelbob]

> Flip the station and the yard. Putting the station against
> the wall allows you to lengthen the tracks further.

I'll give that a try, but I will probably stay with what I have for a few reasons.
First of all, the "yard" is actually intended to be mostly staging, and will be partially hidden. The yard/staging area is also on a shelf, with limited height (8 inches or so) which would really crowd the station I'm planning to use. As far as length goes, 8 feet long should be plenty. If my passenger trains are much longer than that, it will really be a dog chasing its tail.

> Convert the yard area into a coachyard.

Yes, I'm considering that... On the other hand, I also want it for staging, so I'm not sure what I'll do.

> Convert the switching area at the bottom into a freight terminal yard.

Possible...

> a few bits of industrial tracks here and there where possible.

Yes, definitely, once I get the mainline location/design firmed up.

You can operate it prototypically. Have big passenger trains come off the mainline, which can act as a "continuous loop staging" track for multiple passneger trains. Require them to stop and drop sleepers, pick up sleepers, await connections with other trains, and/or combined sections/split sections. Have as many changes to the train consist as possible, thus keeping the coachyard switcher quite busy. And don't forget mail trains and express cars.

That's kind what I'm considering.

You can also have transfers which appear from "staging" (just flip a switch and run them into the yard area) which have to be broken up to be delivered to industries along the terminal railroad, many of which may occupy street running.

Good concept, but I'm not sure if I'll try it. I have another option when I want to do some industry switching and street running. I simply call and mark up for a run on the Ballard Terminal RR. The layout isn't DCC, all the switches are hand thrown and he doesn't have any Kadee couplers. But he does use a radio control system ("Ahead 2 cars 211"), prototypical switch lists, and the super-detailing is excellent. :)

> And don't forget the LCL train of boxcars which has to be made
> and broken up in the frieghthouse yard. All told you could easily
> have three or four jobs operating at once if required.

Or, if left as is, a local that has to serve the industries there.

Oh, and I've got one job you forgot, since you didn't know it was an option... The mine run. More on that next message.

[modelbob]

OK, here's a few more ideas/features I've added.

The green track is the mine branch. I'm still learning 3rd Planit, so it appears it's below the main track, but that's not the case. It would start in the upper left corner, probably off the mainline just before the yard tracks.

It passes under the station building (which is above grade, similiar to this design: http://www.cmrtrain.com/station.html)

It's on a 3 percent grade the whole way. Near the station it starts on a PRR style stone wall fill, then uses a trestle as it gets taller. It crosses the mainline near the station wye, curls around and crosses again, this time on a large through truss bridge.

It then runs near the top of the ridge in the valley at the bottom of the layout (picture scenery sloping up from the mainline) and crosses the area near the duckunder on a large curving trestle. (stone or steel, probably steel).

Once it reachs the right side, it will be visually seperate from the yard due to elevation. Not sure how much heigth difference I'll have yet. If there's enough I'll do a second level. If not, then the yard may be hidden under a mountain. In either case the mine will be up at the top right corner, along with a small yard and run-around track so you can drop off cars and pick up the loads.

Another feature is visible in this picture. There is an engine house (and possible turntable, if it will fit) at the lower right. You pick up your engine there, and go to the yard to pick up your train. If it's a passenger train, then you back into the station and work there. Most freights will be run throughs (read do a few laps and then back to staging) but there will be a local to switch various industries.

[CBCNSfan]

the mine will be up at the top right corner, along with a small yard and run-around track so you can drop off cars and pick up the loads.
Bob how many cars do you plan to be using at the mine? Believe me this is a very important consideration as a run around and a train load under the tipple will take up quite a bit of room. photo is a shot of the crossover and the mine not to mention the runaround that will hold 10 hoppers
There is an engine house (and possible turntable, if it will fit)
What is the longest engine you plan to turn on the turntable?
maybe you'll have better luck with the drawings than I did with mine. when it was time for track alignment, things had to be changed and some drastically :eek:

[modelbob]

> How many cars do you plan to be using at the mine?

It will be a small one, two or three tracks, holding about 4 cars each. The one you show would fit no problem. Don't forget, while this thing looks like a 4 x 8 or 5 x 9 layout due to the circular nature of the mainline, it's actually 10 x 17.

The area I plan for the mine, above the yard, would be 8 feet long. Put in a run-around that's 4 feet long (holds 6 cars or so) and you can bring up a train, swap things around and head out. Yes you may not get around a 10 car train, that would be part of the challenge. Or maybe the branch has to be worked where you shove in, caboose first.

> What is the longest engine you plan to turn on the turntable?

I'm looking at this one http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/933-2829 (and choking on the price) as being the largest one I'd use. I might even go smaller. The bridge is 20 inches, that section is 30 inches wide. It will fit, but obviously it's going to be tight. The enginehouse would be right off the end of the turntable, and as shown, it will use up all the space. I won't have room for service facilities unless I make some changes someplace. I may have to "imply" them rather than actually model them.

> maybe you'll have better luck with the drawings than I did with mine.
> when it was time for track alignment, things had to be changed and
> some drastically...

That's why I'm learning and using 3rd planit. My drawing is to scale. I tested the program by drawing what I'd already built (one track of the mainline is in place pretty much as shown). It worked perfectly, duplicating what I had found.

I also verified it by proving that a real life, full size design we had in mind wasn't possible. I took it to the project designer who looked it over and said "Sure, it will fit, no problem, should be easy. (same initial response I had had...)" I replied "Uh, I can't get it to work, you give it a try". He fired up his drafting program, some small inexpensive one called Autocad, and got the same result.

It's already had some real surprises for me. Look at the station tracks, where the switches connect to the station platform. I spent hours re-working that area. Six feet of approach tracks!?! No way... Yep, that's what it's going to take, no matter how I slice it, if I want to use decent size turnouts.

The looping turn from the station crossing the mainline? That was going to go from the station to the INSIDE of the mainline curve. 3rd Planit said "yeah, right, sure Bob. No problem, long as you don't mind a 15 inch radius curve." Since I'm planning on backing coaches around it, things had to change.

The same thing applies to the branchline. I visualized it as much more twisting, and it probably will be, but again 3rd Planit proved I couldn't do what I had initially thought I could.

So I'm having lots of design issues, only in the computer rather than on the layout.

[abcraghead]

I'm concerned with the branch, which is higher, being on the *inside* of the main, which means that you won't be able to see the mainline from inside as easily.

I also suggest installing a pair of scissors between the two mains. Then, instead of running two mainlines, you could run a single line twice around by setting both scissors to crossover alignment.

[modelbob]

> I'm concerned with the branch, which is higher, being on the
> *inside* of the main, which means that you won't be able to
> see the mainline from inside as easily.

I don't think that will be a problem for a couple of reasons. First of all, I'm only talking 5 or 6 inches higher, maybe a foot max, counting scenery. I've run modules with backdrops much higher and since the main is at the front, you can usually get a good view.

Also, bear in mind that the main viewing location will be from the bottom of the page. That means the switching area and mainline will easily visible. On the downside, it means that the station won't be nearly as visible. :(

> I also suggest installing a pair of scissors between the two mains.
> Then, instead of running two mainlines, you could run a single line
> twice around by setting both scissors to crossover alignment.[/QUOTE]

That's a good idea. It would probably work well on the right side, allowing engines access to the roundhouse from either track, as well as directly to the branchline.

[CBCNSfan]

OK! I'll try again, computer acting up,IE explorer shutting down because it did something illegal or something like that.
I also suggest installing a pair of scissors between the two mains Yipes! :eek: new one on me. What's scissors? Crossovers? :confused:
As far as the branch being higher and *inside* the main, it would be great from the observers area view :) , however if Murphy's Law pervailed it could be a P.I.T.A. for the operator if he was on the inside aisles :o . As Alex says it might be worthwhile reconsidering, unless you've thought this out already. OK I'll accept Bob's faith in 3rd Planit on the distances and fitting, although I see only six or at most seven feet for the mine lead. But then again this is only a JPG representation.
That sure is a handsome turntable, and if it wasn't for the steep price, I'd be downstairs tearing out a wall to make room for my 6 stall roundhouse :D As it is I'll have to scratch build one or wait for ebay.
Well Bob I guess I've nit picked it all I can for now
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

> What's scissors? Crossovers?

While I've not heard them called that either, I'm pretty sure he's referring to what us railroad guys call a 'universal crossover', four switches and a diamond, so that either track can switch to the other or stay on the same track.

> however if Murphy's Law pervailed it could be a P.I.T.A. for
> the operator if he was on the inside aisles :o .

Not a problem, the layout will have walkaround throttles, in fact I've already got a primitive one set up.

> I'll accept Bob's faith in 3rd Planit on the distances and fitting
> although I see only six or at most seven feet for the mine lead.
> But then again this is only a JPG representation.

No, you're right, the way it's drawn I do only have 6 or 7 feet. Once again, 3rd Planit is showing me the accurate design, not what I THINK will fit. I was thinking "OK, 10 feet total, allow 2 for the curve, that leaves 8 feet, right?"
Well it does, if you have the curve near the edge.

> That sure is a handsome turntable, and if it wasn't for the steep price,
> I'd be downstairs tearing out a wall to make room for my 6 stall roundhouse

I'm hoping actual price is less than list. Much less... :)

[CBCNSfan]

Hmmm! thought I was finished, Guess Not :D
four switches and a diamond, Heck isn't that like the photo I uploaded in post #18 ? I thought it was something elaborite. I used #6 turnouts so with the filler pieces that are required you are looking at using up another two feet of space and if you use two of them that's four feet of space gone.

Bob think about it, even if you have radio control and walkaround throttles, and Murphy's law exists on the layout, you will still have to crawl under the the benchwork, depending on which side you are operating from, and you can be sure the problem will always be on the opposite side

What size turnouts does 3rd Planit have for you on the mine lead and sidings? I'm seeing a bit of a problem there, especially if you have 3 tracks. :eek:

On the turntable, I'm afraid unless they have a dumping sale, the price will still be way too high for me. The current price of $300US would cost me $371Cd. plus 15% tax plus shipping lets say about $440Cd,. scratch build would be doable and a lot more affordable in my case.

[modelbob]

> Heck isn't that like the photo I uploaded in post #18 ?

Yes, that's the one.

> you are looking at using up another two feet of space

Yep... I don't think it will fit near the roundhouse like I thought it would. Oh well...

> and if you use two of them that's four feet of space gone.

No, just one. If you line it for the crossover both ways, you end up with a sort of folded figure arrangement. Kind of like those tracks they had on slot car sets where they would change sides. By using just one, you can run on almost all of both loops. Really not that useful unless you want to clean the track or something. Still, it's fun to do, and when I was younger I used to design my layouts so that the train could cover as much of the track as possible with one route.

> On the turntable, I'm afraid unless they have a dumping sale, the
> price will still be way too high for me. The current price of $300US

That's Walther's list price, so you'll find them for $250 or so most likely. $200 would be even better, but probably not as likely.

OK, so $250 is a lot of bucks. But it comes with the turntable, motor AND indexing system for the tracks. Considering all 3 of those, it sounds like a decent deal to me. Oh, and it's pre-weathered too, a nice added touch. (or is it? What if I don't want tracks in all the spots they've 'pre-rusted'? Hmm.... )

[CBCNSfan]

I don't think it will fit near the roundhouse like I thought it would. Oh well... Well it just might, but the roundhouse would have to be just on the edge of the bench work. If the RH is similar to the Heljan one, then from the edge to the center of the turntable would be about 32.5 inches plus another 10" (1/2) of the turn table) for a total of 42 1/2". From the edge to the yard's first turn out is about 7 1/2 ft, so there should be enough room to connect the RH & TT to the mains including the scissors.

[abcraghead]

Yeah, a scissors is a double crossover using a diamond. I don't know if it's a model term, or a prototype term. They are so rare these days anyway, although theya re frequent on commuter/transit lines.

Viola:
http://www.interurbanmedia.com/photo/folio/s/std/maxtracks.jpg

As Bob says, you can get more length of run for a given train this way. I recall a John Armstrong layout design based on local switching, with a twice-around, so that you could run a "through" train on the main, and have it interfere with the switcher crew often, but still with enough time to actually get some work done.

But Bob... GG1? Double Track? You need quad! :D

[CBCNSfan]

a scissors is a double crossover using a diamond AH! now modeling that wouldn't take as much room as the 4 Atlas #6's and a crossover and the tracks could be closer together. Probably would have to be handlaid trackage though.
Still would like to see what 3rd Planit has for the mine, still concerned about that one.
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

Yeah, a scissors is a double crossover using a diamond. I don't know if it's a model term, or a prototype term.

ABC, it may be both. These things tend to have different names in different places. The last one I worked on (real life) was called a "universal crossover" by both the designer and manufacturer. They're also commonly called "double crossovers". But I immediately knew what you meant when you used that term.

But Bob... GG1? Double Track? You need quad! :D

Yeah, and overhead catenary and a large station and a steel mill and a mine and, and... and a building the size of a barn to build the layout in! (Along with a baggage car load of money) I'm going to have some sections of triple track, but not much, since the more track you have the smaller the layout looks and feels..

Meanwhile, no matter how you slice it, my layout is going to be unprototypical. I have two passenger trains, a Sounder and the SP daylight consist. Now maybe, just maybe, I could model Seattle and call it a fan trip. But sneaking the GG1 and K4 in is going to be tough no matter what. :)

So, I'm not even going to try. I'm just going to build a nice looking generic layout and run trains, whatever train suits my fancy that day...

[CBCNSfan]

I'm just going to build a nice looking generic layout and run trains, whatever train suits my fancy that day...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/nibbs/Willis-2.gif OYE'LL Drink Tuh Dat!

[abcraghead]

Bob: simple solution. Make the roundhouse a museum complex, ala Brooklyn, Steamtown, etc.... Viola. You now can have anything there.

[modelbob]

Bob: simple solution. Make the roundhouse a museum complex, ala Brooklyn, Steamtown, etc.... Viola. You now can have anything there.

Yes, that's the story, if anyone is silly enough to ask "what's the prototype?".

To be honest, I'm a "lone wolf" model railroader, though I do have a neighbor who shares the hobby. I rarely show the layout to anyone, since the garage is a mess. When I do, it's generally just to friends, and they're usually of the "hey, model trains, cool!" persausion rather than nitpickers.

[abcraghead]

Another acquaintance of mine is an engineer at TacoRail, and has a layout in his garage in a similar state of disrepair. Last I ran it, we were using 80's BN power on the mainline, and a P2K 0-6-0 on the branchline. There is no scenery and the branch is right above the main yard on a piece of plywood.

However, operations were quite challenging due to a really stiff branchline gradient, and the use of accurate TR style switchlists. I thought it was rather cool, even if it would never win style points.

[HaggisKennedy]

Mine's still in the "foamboard central" stage. Track just lies on top of it, not really spiked or anything. Mainly so I can make sure the trackplan works OK. Of course, parts of it have not changed in 3-4 years....

The only scenery is buildings. Trains seem to run OK, the only uncoupling problem I have was due to mismatched coupler heights (#58s). No derailments caused by trackwork, it's usually due to freight cars being way too light (as in, empty plastic well car....).

Kennedy

[CBCNSfan]

Hi Bob, I noticed you posted your track plan in the photo gallery. Did you give up on the spur to the mine? It would be a shame if you did as it looks quite interesting.
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

Hi Bob, I noticed you posted your track plan in the photo gallery. Did you give up on the spur to the mine? It would be a shame if you did as it looks quite interesting.
Cheers Willis

No, not really. I asked the same question I did here over at the LDSIG on Yahoo. I wanted to see if anyone there has any additional suggestions or ideas.

Even if they don't have any suggestions, just drawing it up gave me an idea for revisions to the staging yard area. I'd already thought of part of them before, and realized that with a minor change at the other end, I can have 4 usable staging tracks instead of 3. That will be helpful.

As for the spur, I won't really design it until I've got the main tracks, staging yard and station areas designed. The spur will take off and gain elevation as it twists back and forth over the main a few times (good excuse to build a few bridges that way).

So the concept is still there but the exact location may change.

[CBCNSfan]

As for the spur, I won't really design it until I've got the main tracks, staging yard and station areas designed. Ok good enough that does make sense, so it's back to some points to ponder about the mainline.
I guess this is good as any time to discuss the passenger service. In a previous post you mentioned the full size passenger cars. Also the max radius will be about 22". There is also a chance you will be running passenger cars around curves of less than 22" radius. That is going to leave a lot passenger car floor overhanging the inside of the track, which is not going to look quite prototypical. Have you considered the shorter passenger cars that are (I believe) made by Roundhouse?
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

> the max radius will be about 22".

Actually, if I use the design I've shown now, the visible curves will be more like 24 or 26. I may even widen the one on the left out to 30 inches, if space is available.

That's one advantage of the "giant oval" design, I can use nice wide radius curves.

[CBCNSfan]

That's one advantage of the "giant oval" design, I can use nice wide radius curves.
Well I could be wrong, but from the plan you posted, the curve in the upper left appears to be around a 15" Radius if the lines are 12" apart. Now if you broaden that out even to a respectable 22" r it appears to me you will have to make some drastic changes to trackage for entry to the terminal. Questionable area in attachement

Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

That is the one sharp curve on the plan. It's at least 18 inch radius though, not 15 inch. I say "at least" since that's what 3rd Planit says it is as shown. I may be able to swing it towards the top of the layout a bit, as well as cheat a bit on the edge of the layout at that point. My goal would be to make that a 20 inch radius.

Unfortunately, that section may be used for backing trains into the station from staging. Not sure if it will work, or if I can only use it for pulling out.

One other point/problem. The diamonds shown would be in the curve if it's built as shown. That means custom built. I'm hoping to avoid that too.

[sushob]

How about something like this?

Please excuse the lack of neatness...I did this in Paint :o with a laptop touchpad.

[modelbob]

How about something like this?

Yes, that's about what I'm hoping to do. The problem is I can't get too close to the wall (top of the plan) but I'm hoping to about split the differencer between what you show and what I drew.

There will be some fine-tuning of areas like this one once I get the basic mailine layout finalized.

[CBCNSfan]

I can't get too close to the wall (top of the plan) but I'm hoping to about split the differencer between what you show and what I drew. Looking at sushob's drawing highlites another point :rolleyes: , looking at the upper left, from the back wall to the edge of the bench work appears to be two feet ( actually a good width for reaching) now your station peninsula seems to be butted against it, leaving no room in between :eek: . That adds another two feet to the back wall. Four foot reach a definate no!no! I can't get too close to the wall and for reaching that would be a true statement.
The way I see it there isn't enough room between yard tracks and station tracks for a popup access hatch. Do you have enough room to move the peninsula south toward the bottom of the drawing? I realize this might cramp the nice broad curve entering the station yard from that direction ;) but all points have to be considered :D
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

OK, based on some comments here and some comments on the LDSIG group, I've come up with a revised plan. To be honest, I'm not sure if I like it yet, and it's only a concept at this point, but it's definitely interesting...

OK, here's a revised version to try and fix a couple of problems noted in various comments.


The track has been changed to be less symmetrical and not always at right angles. The curve from the staging yard to the station has been increased to 20 inch radius for better operations. The custom curved diamonds have been replaced with stock 60 degree diamonds. An access hatch allows better access to the switches at the west (left) end of the staging yard.


I've also totally embraced the passenger / station theme in this version. Passenger trains are now the main focus of this layout.


The staging yard now serves as the coach yard. The switch crew makes up passenger trains by picking up coaches there, and picking up a baggage and/or mail car from the express track.


The train is assembled in the station, then the power is coupled on and the passenger train departs and does a few laps. Upon return, it pulls into the station. The switch crew has to pull the train out so the engine can escape, then they return the cars to the servicing portion of the yard, mail to the express tracks, possibly a special spot for the diner to be re-stocked etc.


The green track is a branchline to allow for some freight operations too. It is actually above the other tracks, climbing up after it passes behind the station (obviously need a bit of re-aligment there, the station itself will be above the tracks, so the branch can pass under the building)


It will meander through the layout, eventually reaching a town and/or mine on the right side. This area will be above, and seperate from, the coach yard area. The tracks will be in the same scene to the duckunder, then the spur will go to a second level.

[CBCNSfan]

Hi Bob, well my first comment is it is now better than before, but unless you are plastic man with a great reach, a lot more has to be done for operator/maintainer comfort.
What I'm refering to is the lack of access room between the coach yard and the pass. terminal. If something derails in the coach yard where's your access? The greyed in area is certainly not enough.
My suggestion is instead of the angling in of the terminal yard, straighten it out. To increase the access to the coach yard, move the freight road parallel to the coach yard, even better would be to move it to the far side where I've shaded in with red since it will be on an incline and higher than the coach road. Even at that depending on the width of the terminal peninsula it will only be about 2 feet. Also your maximum reach to the mine will be barely accessable at 34 inches.
What do you think?
cheers Willis

[modelbob]

Willis,

Interesting ideas, but I see two problems...

1) We're getting back to everything symmetrical, which is something the LDSIG folks say to try and avoid, and I think they're right.

2) The branch line can't go where you suggest. You have no way of knowing this from the plan you were looking at, but that track is on a shelf, built rather heavy duty, from 2 x 4's so it can support storage boxes and the like. Every couple of feet there is support, so no track can go there.

[CBCNSfan]

Every couple of feet there is support, so no track can go there. Hmmm! the plot thickens, you don't have access to the coach yard or shelves after you put the terminal yard and leads in. If the terminal section is not movable, how are you going to access these storage shelves anyway? Something's got to give. Not much sense storing something if you have no access to it.
something the LDSIG folks say to try and avoid, and I think they're right. Who are the LDSIG folks, I never heard of them? One thing obvious is they haven't tried to do what you are trying to do with the same size limited space. Maybe you'll have to go a bit smaller. :D

Cheers Willis

[abcraghead]

I honestly think that trying to fit both the passenger terminal focus and the mine branch line is trying to squeeze too much in. If I were you I'd just pick one of the two and run with that.

Secondly, how about flipping the yard so the throat bends to the left instead of the right, and then putting the passenger terminal in running along the righthand wall to where the engine terminal used to be? A bypass track can continue around to hook into where the timesaver is to allow continuous operation. This gets rid of the peninsula and it's associated problems. Then if you *really* have to have the mine branch, you can put the peninsula back, but less oversized. Have the branch junction off the passenger terminal where the continuous tracks are, and if you make the grade steep enough maybe you could snake it back and forth over the mainline a few times before veering it to the peninsula about where you have the wye now, to a terminus out there.

If none of this makes sense I may be able to cut and paste something together to post.

[modelbob]

> you don't have access to the coach yard or shelves
> after you put the terminal yard and leads in.

I have access, just not easy access. All of my benchwork is built very stout (thus the 2 x 4's) and I can lean on it, crawl on, even stand on it if I wanted too, though my head would hit the ceiling if I tried.

> how are you going to access these storage shelves anyway?

I very rarely access the stuff on them now. It's mostly back issue magazines and some model stuff along with some family memento type stuff. Everything is in those clear plastic tote bins. You want something, you slide the bin off the shelf.

If I put in the penisula, the bins would be stored 2 deep. You're right, accessing the 2nd bin would requiring moving the first one. Then again, it's been well over a year since I pulled any of them out as it is, so it wouldn't be a major issue. Think of it as being like stuff you have stored in the attic. Hassle to get to, but OK if it's only a rare occurence.

> Who are the LDSIG folks, I never heard of them?

It's a Yahoo group, I think it's part of the NMRA, but I'm not sure.

> One thing obvious is they haven't tried to do what you are trying
> to do with the same size limited space. Maybe you'll have to go a
> bit smaller. :D

I'll bet some of them have, it's quite a big group.

[modelbob]

If none of this makes sense I may be able to cut and paste something together to post.

It kind of does, but I'd like to see your take on it...

[CBCNSfan]

All of my benchwork is built very stout (thus the 2 x 4's) and I can lean on it, crawl on, even stand on it Hi Bob, well that is true for 2x4 benchwork, I too used 2x4 construction for mine. However when the scenery is added there is no way I'd be able to stand on it, lay on it, without destroying something that took me hours to complete. Alexander' idea makes good sense, I was thinking along the lines of putting the terminal along the right wall also, but hadn't figured what to do about the coach yard yet, you'd still be able to have the mine but it would be in a different configureation.

Cheers Willis

[abcraghead]

It kind of does, but I'd like to see your take on it...

Alright, here's the crude (and I do say crude) sketch.

[sushob]

Alright, here's the crude (and I do say crude) sketch.
Does anyone else see it or didn't it load properly :confused:

[abcraghead]

Let's try again....

[CBCNSfan]

I like it you did a nice job. What do you think Bob? I think I know the answer :D
Cheers Willis
Bet he says it's too symetrical!

[modelbob]

> What do you think Bob?

It is an interesting design, and not bad. I'll definitely give it some more thought.

There are a couple shortcomings, there is no longer a wye track, which eliminates some operational possibilities, and the engine terminal is deleted. So I'm not sure if I like this version as much as the other one or not.

Meanwhile, I'm currently working on a modified, probably overblown version of the layout, I'll post the results when I'm done.

[modelbob]

Ok, based on lots of feedback, I've modified the design. To be honest, I don't know if I'll use it or not, but it's interesting...

This first is lower level staging. It will be hidden from view, and about 6 inches under the visible portion of the layout.

The second one is the visible portion of the layout. The station has been moved above the yard (which is hidden). You now have two options for continuous running, the double track oval, or a folded dogbone that goes around the room about 1-1/2 times.

[abcraghead]

I like it but for the following:

1.) Engine terminal location. It feels odd to have it out there past the loop. How does the track get to it? Diamonding the curve?

2.) The grey track thing makes no sense. The lower level version seems to indicate that the tracks come out of staging into the timesaver area. However, the upper level one seems to indicate that those tracks come from the upper deck loop. I suppose it could be both, but where are the switches, and how do the two join at the same spot?

Durrr.... I'm lost.

3.) I'd make the station building more of a flat, letting you shove a couple stub tracks into the yard next to the wall. The scenic/structure space you lose would be more than made up for by the extra track capacity/flexibility.

4.) Why not forget about the turntable? You've got a balloon track, which is prototypical for a passenger facility, just use that, and put the engine storage tracks inside of it.

[modelbob]

> 1.) Engine terminal location. How does the track get to it?
> Diamonding the curve?

I haven't decided that yet. Possibly a spur off the looop, or a diamond.

> 2.) The grey track thing makes no sense.

I need to do a bit more work on the switches, and check the grades etc to determine where they meet, but the plan is somewhere close to the duckunder.

Here's a rough description. You start out at the staging yard, climbing up to the visible level. That continues to climb, on a small grade until the station area, which is level.

As you leave the station, if you're on the loop, the track dives down at a 2.5% or so grade, to connect back into itself. Meanwhile the two outer tracks climb up at about 2.5% grade to cross over the loop.

> 4.) Why not forget about the turntable?

Because I like Steam, remember? Steam looks best with turntables and roundhouses.

[modelbob]

Done very quickly and only a rough approximation, this is how I picture the connection betwen the upper and lower sections working. The two outer tracks are going down to staging while the two inner tracks are climbing up to make a complete loop. It may be further to the left, depending on how the grades work out. I don't want the grade to be too steep.

[CBCNSfan]

Bob it's a big improvement over what you had before. However it appears somewhat symetrical which is what you wanted to avoid. There is also a lot of unused space in the center that's begging for attention. I'm not sure of how you intend to fit that engine service center in, looks kind of out of place so might as well make that viewing area also. Just how much height do you have on that shelf where you have two levels of trackage?
I'm also confused about the center tracks in the upper drawing, Where do they decend to, and what do they connect too? The drawing of the lower trackage suggests that it's two tracks connect to the visible trackage at the duckunder.
Cheers Willis

[abcraghead]

Overall I think it's quite workable, and solves the problem of the staging being inaccessible behind the terminal. You do lose a visible coachyard, although maybe you can squeeze a pocket sized one inside the balloon.

The big "fatal flaw" to watch for now is the grade. Factor in that you are only pulling relatively short passenger trains, however, so the grade could be fairly steep. But the thing that is more critical is getting enough height difference between the passenger terminal and the staging beneath, so it doesn't require someone with 1" diameter wrists to get into the latter if something derails.

I like how this is looking however, it's feeling a lot more like a finished layout design. May I recommend a dummy double track diamond near the left throat of the yard, protected by a tower?

[modelbob]

> However it appears somewhat symetrical which
> is what you wanted to avoid.

Well the left side is now less symmetrical, and I may make other changes to avoid that.

On the other hand, it is a shelf layout which limits my options somewhat. Also, since I'm modeling the PRR mainline, having it be relatively straight is OK.

> There is also a lot of unused space in the center
> that's begging for attention.

That comes in later. Think of this right now as simply a 'back of the envelope' design, or sketching things out with Armstrong Squares or whatever. It's far from final, we're merely at the "proof of concept stage.

A couple options are obvious for that area.

1) Put in a mine branch, as ABC shows on one of his drawings.

2) Put in a coach yard, with all the servicing facilities needed.

3) Put in a steel mill, to give it that "Pittsburgh flavor"

A long thin linear space would work well for any of those....

> I'm not sure of how you intend to fit that engine service
> center in, looks kind of out of place so might as well make
> that viewing area also.

Not really an option. I have filing cabinets and storage below that, so it's not going to be open space no matter what. If I make it a roundhouse, folks can walk over and view the locomotives. Then again, this layout isn't going to be seen by a lot of folks, just a few friends, so the main concern is for the operator.

> Just how much height do you have on that shelf where
> you have two levels of trackage?

About two feet total, maybe more. If I make the lower staging only about 6 inches high (which keeps the grade down too) that's lot of room.

> I'm also confused about the center tracks in the upper drawing

They're going down to connect to the staging tracks that come up. See my revised sketch for one option. Another option is to have one set swing far to the right, while the other is to the left, and have them join in a more traditional junction.

[modelbob]

> Overall I think it's quite workable,

Great, thanks.

>Solves the problem of the staging being inaccessible behind the terminal.

Yes, it does that well.

> You do lose a visible coachyard

Maybe... I could easily make the hidden storage visible, and probably will. Granted, the "sky" will be low, but you'll be able to see in there.

Another option is to put something in the center, or even use a one foot wide shelf in front of the depot area.

> The big "fatal flaw" to watch for now is the grade.

Yes and that's why this is being done in 3rd Planit. So far the grades are coming out to be reasonable, in the 2 to 3 percent range. Consider how many HO plans have a figure 8 where the tracks go up and over. Now consider that this layout, while looking like a 4 x 8, is actually 10 x 17. You can gain or lose a lot of elevation in 8 feet on a reasonable grade.

However, the Cad program is taking the guesswork out of that, and telling me what my grades actually are. (As well as making sure the curves fit and those long number 8 turnouts I like and etc etc)

> But the thing that is more critical is getting enough
> height difference between the passenger terminal
> and the staging beneath, so it doesn't require someone
> with 1" diameter wrists to get into the latter if something derails.

I'm shooting for 6 to 8 inches, which I need to try and also need to be sure it's realistic grade-wise.

> May I recommend a dummy double track diamond near
> the left throat of the yard, protected by a tower?

No, you may not. :) You may recommend an actual working crossover however, and that as well as many other options will be considered once I get the basic concept down, i.e. are there turnback loops, if so where, what are the ruling grades, can this all fit, etc.

Oh, wait, you said diamond, I was thinking crossover... Yes, that would be an option...

[CBCNSfan]

if so where, what are the ruling grades, Well here's a bit of info, may be usless but it's from my follies and experimentation. from one of the lowest points of track to one of the highest points of track. The measurement is 1 ft. The bottom grade is a mainline and none of my Athearns have any problem with an 11 car train on 4.17% grade The upper grade of 5.6% is a little more difficult. The Athearns with the brass flywheels slow a bit but have no problem. The older ones with the larger size motors and flywheels seem to work harder, in fact one got a little smelly after 5 or six runs. Oh and 10 car maximum on the upper.
I also have to say these cars were right out of the box and are certainly not top of the line ( Bachmann, LifeLike, Tyco ect ) in fact the whole train wouldn't roll down the grade on its own without a gentle push ( Reboxx reamer and some wheels ordered :) ) Just a suggestion, but a height adjustable incline might be a way to determine the limitations for grades.
Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

OK, here's today's revisions. (I'm spending way too much time on this thing at the moment...)

I've cleaned up the junction area on the right side. Instead of hiding it, why not make it part of the scene? I'll put a tower there and have it be part of the Pennsy flavor by using a typical PRR tower.

The track to the staging can disappear into a tunnel. If I'm lucky, I can place the tunnel portal in a way that hides the fact the track is curving, making it look like it's going someplace else.

The rest of it is the same as before. With the elevations added now, you can see how the track climbs up from staging as it circles the room.

Looks like I can get about 8 inches of seperation between the layers. Not a lot, but even with the plywood for the upper level I'll easily have over 6 inches of clearance. That should work out OK.

I've got plenty more fine tuning to do, but the basic concept look reasonable...

1) The latest plan view

2) The confusing junction between upper and lower levels

3) An overview of the layout.

[abcraghead]

2) The confusing junction between upper and lower levels

Hmm... Freighthouse Square in HO? :p

[modelbob]

This is the first time I've played with the topography option, so this looks more like the Rockies than the Appalachians. Also, I've not yet mastered how to build a tunnel portal.

However, it gives you some rough idea of what this area would look like.

I really like the looks of that wide radius (4 foot or so...) curve.

[modelbob]

Hmm... Freighthouse Square in HO? :p

LOL! No, as you can see from my latest, the lower track wouldn't be visible for the most part, it would look like it's going straight ahead. The loop track would climb up a fill/trestle and cross over the main. I think the scene would look much more realistic with the scenery in place.

[CBCNSfan]

Hi Bob, well it looks real good now. Nice drawing prog you have, I downloaded the Xtrack prog. fooled around with it a bit but can't even get the templates to stay on the drawing, so I'm back to the trial and error method because I'll have the layout finished before I ever learn to use one of them programs.
Cheers Willis

[abcraghead]

LOL! No, as you can see from my latest, the lower track wouldn't be visible for the most part, it would look like it's going straight ahead. The loop track would climb up a fill/trestle and cross over the main. I think the scene would look much more realistic with the scenery in place.

What about disguising it as some kind of flying junction instead? Those were very Pennsy.

[modelbob]

What about disguising it as some kind of flying junction instead? Those were very Pennsy.

I've got one of those too, at the East end of the station. The outer two tracks go to the loop, the inner two drop down to the main. While I don't show it on the plan, I may modify it to be more PRR style, with one of the tracks crossing over another or something. I need to do a bit more research.

(OK, it's a very short section of 4 tracks, but hey, it's there... )

[modelbob]

This is a revised design for my garage layout.


I've spent quite a bit of time reviewing various ideas and trying lots of concepts. During that time, a few of things became obvious.


1) While I could come up with all kinds of designs for double deck layouts etc, I don't have space for that without interfering with the storage that the space is also used for.


2) It's taken me over a month to come up with a revised plan I like. Granted, that takes time, but it also points out that I don't have time to build and operate an overly complex layout.


3) Viewing the existing space and what I have built now helped me eliminate some of the ideas I had as well as come up with this one. A lot of that was based on shelving and other uses in the room.


4) The passenger station will be the focal point of the layout. The building I'm considering using will cost a couple hundred dollars or more. Add in 2 or 3 passenger trains and you're looking at some serious bucks... If/when I get around to buying and building this stuff, do I really want it hidden 10 feet away from the typical viewer? Having it up front seems more logical to me. It can also easily tie into the industrial town shown.


5) Having some added routes and the ability to turn entire trains is important. Most of my original plans were just an oval with a couple sidings. That gets boring pretty quickly. This plan at least gives some alternates, and the working yard, along with a planned branchline, will add some operational interest.

[modelbob]

PS - This plan is also still preliminary. I'm open to comments, suggestions and ideas. Right now I'm simply trying to get the basic mainline configuration designed, then I'll finalize the yards and industries etc.

I still plan on adding a branch line that will be over the top of the upper right staging tracks, and possibly some other industry tracks etc.

So, comments and suggestions are welcome.

[sushob]

Okay, perhaps I'm just missing something, but how do you get to the staging area? Is there access from the other side (the top of the diagram)?

[modelbob]

Okay, perhaps I'm just missing something, but how do you get to the staging area? Is there access from the other side (the top of the diagram)?

Access to the turnouts will be via the square hole marked "access". For the rest of it, there's about a 3 foot reach to get there. Long, but not out of the question. I really don't anticipate needing to get in there too often.

I plan on using a couple of "tricks" too. All staging track will be code 100 since it's sturdier. Also, each end of each track will be equipped with one of those snap track crossing/rerailers, to solve small derailments which are the most common problem. The curve on the right side is a nice wide radius, which will also help. The track is on a slight downgrade to the left, meaning that backing in will be less likely to derail.

During construction, this area will be thoroughly tested. If needed, I'll make provisions for additional access. Another option is to build something that straddles the yard so I can access the staging tracks. The way the tracks are arranged it would be easy to have something like an L shape ladder (picture something like a swim ladder on a boat) to allow access while protecting the yard.

If the layout ever gets scenicked, there would be a removable backdrop there, though I may well just let it sort of "fade to black" in that area, with the cars in the staging area forming a backdrop of their own.

[mushroom2]

Are you planning on going DCC or staying with DC. You have some serious reverse loops going there that might make operation and wiring rather interesting.

[modelbob]

Are you planning on going DCC or staying with DC. You have some serious reverse loops going there that might make operation and wiring rather interesting.

Right now there are only two reversing sections, the two curves. I have no problem wiring these up with DC. I use a control panel with a track schematic. You control direction with a DPDT toggle for each section. I've used it on previous layouts and it works fine.

Now DCC is another story. I don't know how you handle revers loops in DCC, so I guess I'll need to research that some more. I seem to recall they have automatic controls to handle them, but I don't know any details.

[modelbob]

PS - Right now I'm gving some serious consideration to using a modified version of my old control system. It used two DPDT toggles. One chose which transformer controlled the section, the second controlled the direction.

I think I could do the same thing now, and have one of the two settings be for DCC while the other selects conventional DCC. I recently saw an article in one of the model mags (now where did I put that!?!) about a system that allowed a club to use both systems. It seemed a lot more complicated though, not sure why...

[mushroom2]

Don't forget your cross overs are reversing loops electrically.

[CBCNSfan]

The passenger station will be the focal point of the layout. Hi Bob well a bit off present topic of electrical, but there are still a few things to be looked at first. You plan on putting a fair bit of change$$$ into the passenger station and equipment. Now going back previous posts the area at the bottom of the plan was for viewing and I assume entry to the room. You have shifted the station from the center area to the forefront and that is a good move, however unless you plan to have stick people or undernourished viewers and operators I can't see one and one half feet of clearance being enough. It would be a shame for an unintentional blow from an arm or butt to damage or completely ruin the station not to mention any rolling stock parked there. ( Remember Murphy's law) The second thing that comes to mind again is the radius of the loop and the lead to the station. I doubt you will have room for a max radius of 22" and that will leave full length passenger cars looking kind of odd entering and leaving the station.

Cheers Willis

[modelbob]

> Don't forget your cross overs are reversing loops electrically.

Not without the loop sections they're not... Consider this. If you remove the two looping curves on the left side, there is no way to turn a train, thus no reverse loop.

If I take care of those two (or three since I may well add a wye in there) sections, the rest of the layout is just a regular oval, no reverse loops, unless I'm missing something.

[modelbob]

> the area at the bottom of the plan was for viewing and I
> assume entry to the room...
> I can't see one and one half feet of clearance being enough.

No I have to admit I'd be hard press to fit in an 18 inch aisle. The good news is that the are in question is actually 12 feet wide, being the second half of our two car garage err... storage closet and junk repository. I can't use it for layout construction, but there's plenty of room for access there.

> the radius of the loop and the lead to the station.

The loop will be 22 inch radius. That section is 4 feet wide, and the track will go from side to side, so it will fit fine, just like a 22 inch fits on a 4 x 8 sheet. Granted, it will be close to the edge, but it will fit. I can even cheat a bit on the width if need be and make it 4' 6" or something.

The curve into the station was drawn quickly. It may well be 30 inch radius, with a curved turnout instead of the wye shown there. Again, this is still in the rough layout stage, one step beyond the "armstrong squares" stage at the moment, and not final by any means.

[CBCNSfan]

Hi Bob the station is stub ended, do you plan to back the passenger train in , or a straight run in and change engines for outward bound?
Cheers Willis

[sushob]

I think I could do the same thing now, and have one of the two settings be for DCC while the other selects conventional DCC. I recently saw an article in one of the model mags (now where did I put that!?!) about a system that allowed a club to use both systems. It seemed a lot more complicated though, not sure why...
I remember reading that too...but I don't think I have the magazine anymore. It did seem a but complicated though. I think they were using DCC in a few small sections, and DC everywhere else. If I recall, they had a lot of 'blocks.'

[mushroom2]

> Don't forget your cross overs are reversing loops electrically.

Not without the loop sections they're not... Consider this. If you remove the two looping curves on the left side, there is no way to turn a train, thus no reverse loop. I got to quit trying to analyze stuff when I can't see straight. I was thinking of "fun with toggle switches" on those crossovers. Sheesh.

[NWR #200]

Another acquaintance of mine is an engineer at TacoRail, and has a layout in his garage in a similar state of disrepair. Last I ran it, we were using 80's BN power on the mainline, and a P2K 0-6-0 on the branchline. There is no scenery and the branch is right above the main yard on a piece of plywood.

However, operations were quite challenging due to a really stiff branchline gradient, and the use of accurate TR style switchlists. I thought it was rather cool, even if it would never win style points.

And switch indication dispatching... Josh decided to fly down that branch at a scale 60 mph, slam on the brakes, slide 4 feet, and nearly side swiped my intermodal train, being led by a BN SD-9 and Gp-9, go figure :D

Getting back on topic here.
I feel that the engine terminal takes upa bit of space. That area could be better suited for the mine you talked about, or which I would like to see, a sorta Port of Tacoma type thing. Possibly a large train-ship grain elevator, an auto unloading center, or an intermodal yard. You could then place the loco servicing up by the yard. However, that would most likely rule out the 20" turntable, or a turntable at all. Maybe just a couple of tracks with some fuel cranes and a sanding tower. You could then use your yard to receive cars from the industrial area and the port. Have a switch crew block up cars into Z trains and road freights, and go on your merry way.

[modelbob]

> I feel that the engine terminal takes up a bit of space.

That's true, but it also provides a place to park my locos, and display them.

> That area could be better suited for the mine you talked about

The mine will be near the engine terminal, above the (hidden) staging tracks, if the layout ever gets that far...

> I would like to see, a sorta Port of Tacoma type thing.
> Possibly a large train-ship grain elevator, an auto unloading
> center, or an intermodal yard.

There's nowhwere near enough room for any of that stuff, the space is actually pretty small. I'll be hard pressed to fit an enginehouse in there.

[HaggisKennedy]

One of my modules has some spurs added to it so I can put in an engine house plus a couple of places to park locos and cars that need setting out. These weren't originally included in the track plan I found, but there was space to stick them in without cluttering up the place.

You never have enough space for everything. But, once you have all the pieces out there, you can be surprised what will work with some fiddling around....

Kennedy

[modelbob]

> You never have enough space for everything. But, once you have
> all the pieces out there, you can be surprised what will work with
> some fiddling around....

I'm quite certain I can add some more spurs and sidings etc.

I also know I can't do the Port of Tacoma any justice. They run an awful lot of container trains and 5 pack well cars are long, no matter how you look at it.

Also, I'm way too familiar with the real thing. The Pierce County Terminal project was a yard that was about 7,000 feet long. I was our company's (the rail installation contractor) project engineer on it, and so I know just how big it really was. Nothing I could fit into a 5 foot space, or even a 20 foot space, would do it justice in my mind.

That's one reason I'm planning on the mine spur. 40 foot hoppers can make a longer looking train in a relatively short distance.

[NWR #200]

To my calculations you would ONLY need 80' 6" to make the yard prototypical :D