Oh John, really. You know I'm just jealous because I don't have 30' to work with!
If you just look at the track plan, mine is as caricature as you get. Bridges spilling right out of tunnels, main lines appearing 2, 3, even four times in a scene. Good lord, I even have roads that don't start or end anywhere!
But there's a definite rythm to it, and it certainly helps that I chose a prototype that plays peak-a-boo with a bunch of mountains, rivers and other railroads...
What drives it all is the operations of the model itself. While this is based loosely on the prototype operation, it is in no way a direct replica. It can't be. There isn't enough room. So, I have some tight curves and steep grades. That's okay. A little scenic trickery, and you can block those things from your view.
And when you get right down to it, most of us share our layouts through photography. Talk about slight of hand! Dave Vollmer's door looks like it might fill a basement! Skibbe's module looks like it might be a prototype shot! So what the hell am I worried about compressing 100 miles out of a 110 mile route?
The key is to decide what compromises are going to be acceptable to your particular modeling pallet. One of Ian's compromises, for instance, was to blow a hole in the wall (and I suspect his wallet) to add on to the basement so he wouldn't have to compromise (as much) on the modeled distance! For me, I had to accept that my layout would be all "model railroady" looking. But it operates the way I want it to operate, so it's all good.
Lee
