As I say on a previous post like a number of people here I am new at this. Been researching the layout. I have room for a 6x10 table that can be expanded in the future to 8x16 but since this is the begining I want to keep it fairly simple with the option to expand. I have looked at Atlas's Ho-8 ( Super Pretzel ) and HO-16. Are these decent style plans to start with realizing there will be modifications and expansion down the road? We are thinking on a coal hauling theme basically because my son is an engineer on a tug hauling coal out of Norfolk. I am considering this a learning experience before moving on to more complex operations so I do not want this first part to be real complex. Any thoughts and ideas are appreciated. Thanks
Thinking on Layout
- Thread starter bwings
- Start date
hamltnblue
Active Member
Welcome to the forums.
As you already noted, it's best to start with a basic setup and get the hang of things and have some fun before moving further. There's plenty of info here and other sites. Good luck.
As you already noted, it's best to start with a basic setup and get the hang of things and have some fun before moving further. There's plenty of info here and other sites. Good luck.
I'm not familiar with those track plans so I really can't give you an opinion. A 6x10 table is actually a pretty big start compared to most beginner's layouts. The first warning I'll give you is about reach. The average man can reach in about 33" before you start knocking things down. The first thing to check with these layouts and your room is if you have any places that are more than 33" in without access. If so, that's something you need to change immediately, either by orienting the layout so you can reach everything or adding an access hole somewhere in the middle.
Many Atlas plans have way too many tracks, with almost impossible grades, and tracks that don't serve any real purpose. Atlas makes these plans to sell track and switches, not necessarily to give you a good operating layout. I'd encourage you to go to www.nmra.com and read the Beginner's Guide. It will answer many of your basic questions about layouts and give you some food for thought about good and bad track plans.
Many Atlas plans have way too many tracks, with almost impossible grades, and tracks that don't serve any real purpose. Atlas makes these plans to sell track and switches, not necessarily to give you a good operating layout. I'd encourage you to go to www.nmra.com and read the Beginner's Guide. It will answer many of your basic questions about layouts and give you some food for thought about good and bad track plans.
ICG/SOU
HO & O (3-rail) trainman
Be advised that an average man can reach 33" when the layout is at about 33" off the floor. My layout is 54" or so off the floor, and 30" is a stretch. I'm 6'2" and wear 35/36" in sleeve length.
stationmaster
Crusty Old Geezer
If'n it were me? I build it modular. Working with smaller sections(modules) and areas is quicker and one gets a better feeling of progress. Thus, not getting the doldrums and getting discouraged when things seem to be going slowly. And it adds versatility to the layout. You will never get bored with your layout when all you have to do is change out a module(about 10 minutes if you do it right) to change the whole scene by swapping out a module or two.
Check out the NMRA website and follow their best practices and standars of constructing a modular road. It's best to have a plan and a set of "rules" to guide you. The NMRA does a good job of giving you these guidelines. There is another group, though in my old age, I forget their name, that dedicates itself to modular construction and setting standards for construction.
Bob
Check out the NMRA website and follow their best practices and standars of constructing a modular road. It's best to have a plan and a set of "rules" to guide you. The NMRA does a good job of giving you these guidelines. There is another group, though in my old age, I forget their name, that dedicates itself to modular construction and setting standards for construction.
Bob
Beachbum
Member
I second the comments on the Atlas track plans and going modular. Atlas plans tend to be what are called "spaghetti bowls" - tracks packed in with pointless loops and crossovers. I prefer designs that have a reason for tracks being where they are. But everybody has to decide for himself what he wants.
I also think modular construction is easier and more flexible than complex benchwork. But that borders on a "religious" argument like foam vs plywood, cork vs WS foambed, HO vs N-scale, and so on...
I also think modular construction is easier and more flexible than complex benchwork. But that borders on a "religious" argument like foam vs plywood, cork vs WS foambed, HO vs N-scale, and so on...
Western Star
The Fastest Freighter
I think most people are too hard on most Atlas plans, but in this case I agree, the HO-8 is just a mess. It looks like one should be able to run three trains simultaniously, but because of all the crossings usually just one train can move at a time. I would not recommend any further consideration of that plan.
HO-16 is actually where they took an "original" toy train like plan and expanded it. In the original book, HO Track Plans for Custom Line Track, this plan's chapter is called "Expanding a 4x6 in to a real railroad". It is for running three really short trains and has the operational limitation of being flat with a crossing. It does not say "hauling coal" to me at all. Are you hauling coal in 1950s or modern day? for 1950's look at HO-33 or HO-20. Either of those could be adapted especially in the space you have available and KNOWING that expansion will happen.
Modern coal or historical coal? There will be big differences in both the trains and trackwork. Most of the Atlas plans were originally developed and published in the 1950s and assume 40' and 50' freight cars and when a Trainmaster was a monster locomotive and a GP9 or F7 was normal.
Modern coal facilities do have big train loops in them. The coal trains are never broken up in yards, but remain together as a unit train.
Here is a 1930's coal hauler (2'x8' in N-scale) by Texas Zepher on another forum. The concept could easily be addapted to HO scale. Notice how the mine is up on a hill and the main line runs through the valley below. The mine has its own locomotive that moves full coal cars down onto the main spur (dog leg one) by the main line and picks up any empties to take back to the mine. The locomotive has its own track up a the mine, that short track at the leftmost top. The main railroad's next local train picks up the full loads and takes them somewhere off layout (the hidden tracks in the back). Likewise the main railroad returns empties for the mine train, as well as switching the grain elevator and stock yards. The Main railroad also has passenger and through freights rumbling through all the time (once again to and from the hidden tracks in the back).
Last edited by a moderator:
stationmaster
Crusty Old Geezer
My layout, although modular, started out its life as one of Atlas' "cookie cutter" plans. Though a bit of thinking and redesigning, somewhat, I was able to to make the necessary modifications to convert to modular.
Something does have to be said about Atlas plans. They seem to be rather complete. Giving the builder measurements ans such for each piece to be cut.
Bob
Something does have to be said about Atlas plans. They seem to be rather complete. Giving the builder measurements ans such for each piece to be cut.
Bob
Thanks for all the replies. I am retinking my ideas and will being going the modular so that I can go a step at a time. The idea I have now is similar to the Western Pacific RR, layout 28, in the102 Realistic Track plans. There will have to be some modifications bcause of space availabilty but it is the general idea. As far as era, I am thinking the late 40's to 50's. I think this this would give me flexibility in equipment. I like the steam engines but I would be able to go with diesel. This is not going to be based on any particular prototype although I am looking at Norfolk&Western as to use as a free lance model. Thanks again for the info.
stationmaster
Crusty Old Geezer
You seem to be modeling the same era as I am. If you go to say 1962, basically the end of steam, you give yourself a bit more selection as far as head end power. But, remember, NW was one of the last bastions of steam.
I model an interchange of sorts. There are (6) roads interchanging, C&O, NKP, PRR, NYC, Monon, and Wabash. The area I grew up, had all of these roads within 25 or so miles of my home. And (4) of them were within a bicycle ride for a young modeler.
Modeling NW, you will definitely have to have a coal mine and loading tipple. I have a couple of modules dedicated to such a task as the C&O, PRR, and NYC were coal carriers. The NKP prided itself on fast freight. And don't forget passenger service.
The neat thing about modular layouts is the versatility. If done correctly, you can change out modules and create a totally different scene. And if you ever have to move it, it is MUCH easier.
Good luck.
Bob
