Hello again!

[ScrewySqrl]

Some of you might remember me, though its been a couple of years since I've been here.

I've been running with a 30x80 door layout for a couple of years, but Have grown frustrated with it over a couple of things: reach issues in the back right corner since both the back and right side were against a wall, and the fact the track is completely flat.

So I'm starting over.

plan at present is a 3x5 space,  one edge will still be against the bookcase (left side), and the back will still be against the wall.  but I'll be able to reach the right side fully, and 2/3 of the left side, which should eliminate any reach issues

Track will be Atlas type 80, because I already have a ton and a half of it.

I also was bored with the flat layout, and want to do some elevation changes and over-n-under with this layout.

so, what i'd like:
Over/under layout of some kind, probably a folded dogbone. grades of even percentage (2, 3 or 4%) for the ease of use of Woodland Scenics risers -- trains won't be very long anyway just 5-10 cars, so 4% grades are fine
3 industry sidings to make it look interesting an offer operation options.
small yard (inglenoook to something slightly larger. at least 3 tracks able to be operated without fouling the main by preference.)


What I have in mind so far:


and a 3D image



right now my thoughts are an Appalachian small town, somewhere in the era 1960-1990. The town will be mostly on the right side and in front of the yard and industries, following the road.  I haven't put in the town yet but it will be mostly DPM buildings, and some other items I already have lying around

the right slide climbs up a 3% grade, starting after the last switch and climbing until the bridge. Both climb from the base up to 2.25", giving 2 inches of clearance in the tunnels, plus space for a 1/4" foam to support the upper level. Trains will be short (engine plus 5-7 cars, usually) so the 3% grade is not going to be difficult for trains to climb.

Industries on the lower level: Corn/Soybean Grain silo (white cylinders), Furniture factory (black building), food Processor (red building), and the interchange with a larger road (N&W, L&N, or NS, CSX), on the upper level (3x5 only) instead of the usual coal tipple, its an aluminum smelter powered by a nearby Hydroelectric dam (off the layout). the black figure with 2 red circles represents the location of the power pack to run everything. its small enough that one wire to the yard, and another wire to the nearby tracks will be all that is needed to actually run this. I prefer manual switches, so no additional wiring would be needed.

so, now that I've shown my plans, please tear them apart as this board is wont to do!

Tell me how I can improve it!

(edit: image correction)

[ScrewySqrl]

what, is it perfect or something?

I expected some harsh criticism by now

[Jbub]

It looks like a fun little layout to me. Fairly simple to build and easy to run. I'm no expert though, so I can't really critique it. If I didn't have delusions of grandeur I would (should) build something like this for my first layout.
Best advice though, have fun with it.

J to the bub Jason

[Lemosteam]

If I read correctly, the bookcase is on the left?

You may want to consider flipping the plan about the vertical axis in your image.  If you can only reach 2/3 of the layout on that side, you have compounded that issue by having tunnels in that corner.  Having the tunnels on the opposite side will allow you to access the tunnels from an access door or something like that.

Open track in that corner will allow you to at lease pick up cars in a derailment.

[SirTainly]

1960-90 is a big era, do you plan to just run everything together, or swap out stock, road vehicles etc for each decade?

[ScrewySqrl]

1960-90 is a big era, do you plan to just run everything together, or swap out stock, road vehicles etc for each decade?

the layout will be on (chocked) wheels, so that the ~3 foot open space can be all on the right or all on the left, or even wheeled out into the room, in order to reach difficult to handle places.

1960-90 is a big era, do you plan to just run everything together, or swap out stock, road vehicles etc for each decade?

the precise time isn't nailed down quite yet, but basically 4-axle diesel era, cars from 34-foot tankers 40 to  50 foot boxcars, 40 to 55 foot reefers, and so on, again limited by 9.75" curves. with small "heritage" steam added with the 0-5-0 switcher (4-6-0, 4-6-4:)  I have some ancient con-cor and lifelike passenger cars that will *negotiate* the 9.75 curves, but won't look very good doing it.

RS-, SW-, GP- class engines (and my SCL #1776 U-boat), steamers would be small - no more than 8 total axles (like a 4-6-0 has 5 axles) to fit the necessary 9.75 curves

[C855B]

...1960-1990... the precise time isn't nailed down quite yet, but basically 4-axle diesel era, cars from 34-foot tankers 40 to  50 foot boxcars, 40 to 55 foot reefers, ...

4-axle diesels were fading out of favor in the '80s, at least on the Class I roads. Your bigger determinant is the desired car lengths. 60' cars were becoming dominant in the '70s, and 40- and 50-foot boxcars in general service were scarce from 1980-on, especially since the Staggers Act gave the railroads carte blanche to price small carload customers out of the market.

In so many words, the type of railroading it sounds like you want to model pretty much ended around 1980.

[ScrewySqrl]

Thanks, I'll take that into account, though I suspect short lines held on to the locos and smaller cars a bit longer.  Mid 70s will likely do just fine as a target era

[ScrewySqrl]

some plan updates:

two ideas I'm bouncing around:

Plan 1)


Basically the same plan as before, with the yard turned around and stretched to 7-4-4 capacity. Also added a second runaround/arrival-departure entrance to the longest yard track. 3% gades get us to 2.25" from the last turnout to the left side of each of the two bridges. Mainline run is just over 3/4 of a scale mile (0.77 miles).   Shown are a pair of power packs. An old Life-like pack on the left with a centerline off.  with direction control purely in which way you turn the knob, for easier control in the yard.  On the right is a traditional power pack for running the mainline and switching industry.

Plan 2)


This plan moves all the industries to the upper level (at a 2" elevation) and runs a mere 2% grade that starts on the left while still in the tunnels/covered by the road bridge(2 segments into the tunnel) and continues up to the right side of the KATO double warren truss bridge.   All the industries have been moved to the elevated section on the left, built around the curved passing siding.  The yard now links to the outside of the curve on the lower level, with a large area on the right for an urban scene.  roads falsely disappear into 'tunnels' that will just be the plaster covered woodland scenics risers, although one road climbs up to the industrial zone.  In addition, this track plan has *two* interchange tracks: upper level on the left and lower level on the right, allowing the options of through traffic.  The double folded dogbone track gives a longer mainline run: 1.20 scale miles. Power pack isn't shown here, but would be in the center, in front of the track.

Era will probably remain mid-70s either way.

[ScrewySqrl]

ping?

Anyone?

Anyone?

[ristooch]

I'll take a shot. Standard disclaimer of not being an expert. I prefer plan #1. Plan 2 seems too "spaghetti-bowly" to me, but if that's what floats your boat, go for it.

In plan 1, are the black and gray rectangles with red circles structures?

If so, fine, but if they are power packs, I suggest you get them off the layout. Put them on a shelf or a separate piece of wood and connect when you want to run. If they are, in fact, structures, find a different spot for the black rectangle at lower left and lengthen the 2 shorter yard tracks. Might gain you a car in each.

I like the track that stubs off the layout at Top Dead Center - good for interchange and pulling cars on/off layout. I can see it also needs to be a switching lead for the industry next to the road (approximately in the middle where I think you have tanks). You could run the angled stub at lower right off layout also, for similar reasoning. Hope this helps.

Paul Ristuccia
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[Ed Kapuscinski]

That is still a LOT of track in a small area.

[ScrewySqrl]

It doesn't look as bad in 3d due to elevation changes:

[davefoxx]

I think you have too much going on in your available space.  It's going to be very tough to create a realistic looking topography with all of the different elevations in close proximity.  I suggest cutting back on track.

DFF

[milw12]

If I may, I've always liked DKS's small Treaton layout:

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/?topic=38023.0

No over-under, but to me the plans strikes the perfect balance of track in a small space, and as the thread discusses, the curve radius and other dimensions can easily be expanded to fit your situation.

Chris333's take on it is phenomenal:

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/?topic=32315.msg378631#msg378631

DKS had some other small layouts with over-unders, but I'm not sure if if those are lost with his server. And the nice thing about having less track other than avoiding a spaghetti bowl, it is much easier on the wallet   

Food for thought, have fun!

-Lucas