newbie starting out

[choops]

Couple options.
if the peninsula comes in from the side it will be longer.
Both drawings show 28" radius minimum.
Steve

[trailrider]

I fully understand your desire to run your father and grandfather's locomotives. I have been in the hobby off-and-on for over 50 years, and still have several small steam locos that I put together from kits when I was a kid. With over 50 locomotives, steam and diesel, there is no way that I can convert them to DCC. Not enough time nor money. OTOH, I wanted sound in some of my newer diesels, which works better with DCC. What I have done is to wire my latest layout (14 x 14 dedicated room) in blocks for DC. Model Rectifier Corp has a basic dual mode power system, the Tech 6. The Tech 6 6.0 amp will handle about anything, including older open-frame DC motors, but I can switch to DCC for locos so equipped. (To avoid inadvertantly burning up any DC motors by forgetting to switch to DC mode, I installed a DPDT toggle which has one side connected to a separate DC power pack. Not necessary, unless you are like me and have difficulty walking and chewing gum at the same time. Eventually, I will probably convert some of my favorite larger steam locomotives by installing both the DCC decoder and a sound decoder in the tender. The little puffers just don't have the room.

Also, I would cut the end MINING module off at a 45 degree angle to keep from banging yourself as you come in the door. As far as a duckunder is concerned, it depends on how high off the floor the base height of the layout is. You might consider a lift-out, or a hinged lift at the door. There are several designs that I've seen in magazines. You could probably google the subject in both Model Railroader and Railroad Model Craftsman.

[HopefulEnthusiast]

Thank you for all the comments.

joe circus, thanks again. I hope you are a making good progress on your layout!

Pete V, good to know I can use the shells. thank you

Doughless, very helpful insight. And thank you for welcoming me to the site!

Iron Horseman, good question. I like the idea of making and breaking up trains. Plus I just think it would be really fun to model a yard. However, I need to do some more research.

choops, thank you for taking the time to sketch this. Awesome! It is helpful to see what I am working with at this early stage in the process.

trailrider, thank you. A lot of good stuff here to consider here, some I will need to research more. I like the hinged idea if I go with concept 1. I am interested in seeing your 14x14 plan, is it posted somewhere?

Steinjr, This is extremely helpful to me, thank you! It is true, I don’t know what I want to model. I only know that I want to model. And I want to enjoy every phase of the process, taking my time. There is no real rush or urgency as long as I am always making progress, otherwise I fear I will lose interest.

I have ordered a copy of Armstrong’s “Track Planning for Realistic Operation." In the meantime, I will be spending some time at the library and book stores reading up on rail history and hope to visit the local model railroad clubs this weekend (twin cities). And of course here on the forum!

I plan on doing my conceptual plan in Google sketch-up, because I am familiar with it, and the track plan in CADrail (demo version for now) because I have an AutoCAD background. I will be looking forward to the time when I have more to share. The feedback on this site is Awesome!!!

Thank you,
Andy
Hopeful Enthusiast

[steinjr]

Originally Posted by HopefulEnthusiast

It is true, I don’t know what I want to model. I only know that I want to model.

If you don't know what you want to model, it would be smart to start small and make a test layout, instead of trying to fill up an entire room.

E.g make a layout consisting of shelf along one wall, consisting of a six foot yard and a six feet of mountain scenery (which doubles as a switching lead for the yard.

Or, if you already know you want continuous loop around the room and you absolutely want to build bench work before deciding what you want your layout to do - do tables or shelves around the perimeter of the room, but make them 18" deep instead of 24" deep, and don't build any peninsulas.

Yet. You can always add to the layout later - making it wider in parts, narrower in parts, and adding peninsulas. But for starters - leave yourself lots of floor space, and don't try to fill up the room with layout.

A good layout will cost a lot of time and a lot of money. Don't start out by cramming in as much bench work as you can if you don't know what your goal is.

Here are some layouts designed for a space smaller than what you have:

A Red Wing inspired layout in 8x10 http://www.layoutvision.com/id57.html

A MR Virginian layout in 8x10 : http://www.layoutvision.com/id56.html

Note that neither of these plans are sticking rigidly to a fixed bench work depth.

Fixed depth bench work is good for modular layouts (which needs to be able to match up with modules made by other people, working to the same spec). For a home layout, there is no particular advantage to making each section rectangular and the same size.

Smile,
Stein

[HopefulEnthusiast]

Originally Posted by steinjr

If you don't know what you want to model, it would be smart to start small and make a test layout, instead of trying to fill up an entire room.

E.g make a layout consisting of shelf along one wall, consisting of a six foot yard and a six feet of mountain scenery (which doubles as a switching lead for the yard.

Thank you. This is what I needed to hear. I will post again with more specific questions.

[steinjr]

Originally Posted by HopefulEnthusiast

Thank you. This is what I needed to hear. I will post again with more specific questions.

No prob. Btw - be aware of the fact (as you probably already are) that even though the rest of us can make suggestions, you are the one who has to make the final decisions on what you want to do.

Here is a quick sketch to try to give you an idea about what might fit in a small test layout - I have used Peco code 70 track and turnouts for this:



Not at all a given that this includes some of the things you might want - it is fairly generic.

Smile,
Stein

[HopefulEnthusiast]

okay, progress is slow going ... but it is progress. After trying several demos, i've settled on XtrkCAD for the planning. Attached is a rough approximation of the layout presented above by Stein Jr. I know mine needs some work so just looking for some feedback about best ways to improve it. thank you.

[steinjr]

Originally Posted by HopefulEnthusiast

okay, progress is slow going ... but it is progress. After trying several demos, i've settled on XtrkCAD for the planning. Attached is a rough approximation of the layout presented above by Stein Jr. I know mine needs some work so just looking for some feedback about best ways to improve it. thank you.

The most obvious difference is the lowermost track. Try to image running trains on the track plan.

To get anything into or out of the lowermost track, you cannot have much on the second to lowest track, since most of that track is used for access to the lowermost track, anything going into the lowermost track must fit to the right of the crossover on the lowermost track, and there is no way to sort things on the lowermost track - the last loco to come in must also be the first one out, since any other locos on that track will be trapped behind the last to arrive.

Look at my track plan again - tracks branch out from the left, and the switchback for the lowermost track is quite a bit bigger. Try to avoid the waterfall effect of "right hand turnout - straight - next right hand turnout" and so on and so forth - it eats up length very fast. Better to go e.g. RH - LH - LH or RH - RH - LH down the yard ladder, leaving as long as possible yard tracks.

Smile,
Stein, on vacation in MN

[otiscnj]

Hopeful,

I agree with Stein; start small. Gets you something to run right away, which you can expand when you have a better idea of what you want to model.

I have a CAD background and found the old Abracadata's 3D Railroad Concept And Design program to not have to steep a learning curve, + it has a lot of 'blocks/objects/templates,' that you can drop into your plan.

Good luck!