Starting a layout this weekend

[AlkemScaleModels]

Nope, no real still mill. The one thing that your book made VERY clear is that it absolutely eats up space, and modeling time. Besides, the class one action at them was usually pretty far removed from the mill.

However, as I mentioned, your book really started me on the path to this concept. I saw your N scale Sparrows Point plan, and thought "well, what about modeling the other side of Browns yard?" from there I came up with this, where browns yard would've been in the upper left (where the current yard is). I was going to focus that section on the branch, where the mill was at the end (justifying more than the single local on it).



I realized that I didn't quite want to get into building ALL of that plan (right now), so I scaled it back a bit (to this one).

However, you'll see there's still a lot of basement left, so hmm... that mill does sound tempting. Is that the whole Alkem Steel complex? Or just some structures?

Just a blast furnace and a section of ore yard.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Ah, ok.
I'll keep that stored in the back of my head...

In other news, vindication on the lack of an engine terminal:
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1447706

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Also, the look of the yard, a little bit:
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1878222

[tom mann]

Well Ed,

I think that with wood paneling, a bunch of doors stuck together at waist-height arranged in a 'u', you will take on a "creepy guy down the street who plays with trains in his basement" persona.  If you must use doors and the rigid, inorganic configuration that is forced on you by them, at least work on your track plan so that it flows a little better.  As is, the track arrangement resembles the rigidness that unitrack or snaptrack creates.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Of course the design looks like snap track... that's what I used to get the radii right.

I think you're going to be surprised with the way that it's all going to end up looking, obviously I'm not planning on just letting it look dumb.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the "flowing organic" trackplans though. Take a look at the way that real railroads are built, they're straight, then they curve. There are places where the curves are gentle, but by and large, they are pretty snap tracky.

I guess one of the things I'm trying with this is to see if it IS possible to build something high-end without having to engage in a bunch of overly complicated stuff below the styrofoam.

[Kevin Yutz]

Im anxious to see your progress on this Ed.  I've only heard you talking about it for quite a bit now and cant wait to see it.

Now I just need to convince you to stage some of that Western Export coal in your yards and we'll be OK to go....

[Blazeman]

In my very limited experience, using your sketched plan as a guide while you free flow the track (pinning flex track) produces a marked difference on the foam opposed to what's on the paper. You'll get some gentleness to your transitions that just won't appear on your pencil copy. Spacing between the tracks also will open other options to you.

[AlkemScaleModels]

Of course the design looks like snap track... that's what I used to get the radii right.


I'm actually not a huge fan of the "flowing organic" trackplans though. Take a look at the way that real railroads are built, they're straight, then they curve. There are places where the curves are gentle, but by and large, they are pretty snap tracky.

The reason for that is that it is the easiest and least expensive alignment to survey. But prototype railroads use very gentle curves compared to model RRs. That helps avoid the snap track look with impossibly tight radii. In any case, make sure you include easements leading into and out of the curves.

[wm3798]

Okay.  Here I am. 

1.  I encouraged you to consider using doors as fast, cheap and easy benchwork.  I think that's going to work out fine for you, given the urban branch line flavor you seek.  However, I would caution against everything being on 36" doors.  Use a 36 where you have to, like on the peninsula, but drop back to 18's or 24's for the linear runs.  You're also tying your hands by having the loop working the way it is.

2.  It's commendable that you're getting ready to launch into something, even if it's anything.  However, I think you're straying too far afield from the original concept, and should really sit down and put some serious thought into where you want to go with this.  I think it would be a lot more productive for you to take some more time and put your thoughts down on paper as to not only what the track plan should be, but also how the scenery that will provide the underpinnings for your theme will work amid that track plan.

Try this.  Take your proposed door configuration, and identify roughly where the yard will be, where the brewery will be, and then layout the street grid of the neighborhood around them BEFORE you layout the track plan.  Where will highway overpasses and/or underpasses be?  Where will larger buildings be?  The brewery building will more likely be oriented to the neighborhood street grid than to the branch line (this is the east coast, and the streets were here first!)  Then you need to think about the overall terrain.  East Baltimore is not flat.  Streets rise, so foundations are built up, and some of that street trackage is on a grade.  How will you model that?

Some of those industrial routes have absurdly tight curves, because they have to owing to the nature of the surrounding real estate.

In other words, you need to think out what the whole thing will look like, then come back and fit the railroad in almost as an afterthought.

If it matters at all, I went through these exercises for almost 3 years between the time I claimed my train room and the time I drilled the first hole.  Fact is, I'm still working through this process now as the expansion gets underway.  The first part of my layout that got built wasn't a complete layout.  But it was the most critical part of the proposed traffic flow.  It included the key junction at MY, which establishes the two main types of traffic that runs on the layout.

While it's entirely possible that you're planning this as an exercise, I thought that's what the Kidney was for?  Why burn daylight on another test bed?

I agree with Dave V.  Where's the connection to the outside world?  Where are the staging tracks that help build the illusion of the wider world?  And I'm going to step on your neck here, You need to have something for servicing your engines, even if it's just a stub track with a paved lot where the oil truck pulls up.  It needs to be modeled, again to support the plausibility of the concept.  (a "real" connection to someplace off layout is also critical to support the idea that the heavy work is done someplace else... bringing fresh horses in from the shops can be an added feature of the ops session...impossible without a connection and staging.)

What might be better would be to go back to the "dream design" and pick a part of that that you can start with.  Don't worry about completing a loop.  Build it out as if it was part of the finished layout, because it is.  If you don't have enough of the dream design ready to pick a section to build, then that's what you need to work on this weekend.

BTW, do you have the book "The History of the Northern Central?"  I saw it in a second hand book shop in OC the other day.. $55.  (They also had Rails Across Delmarva, which I have coveted since my friend Larry kiped it from the Dorchester Public Library...)

Lee

[MrKLUKE]

.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Thanks Jeff, that was actually subconsciously in my mind, but didn't realize its influence until very recently.

Those pics help immensely though. Thanks!

[AlkemScaleModels]

If you want to see curved yards, look at the C&O in VA and WV. All are curved to some extent. I built a curved yard on my old Quinnimont. Radii were about 24". Never had any problems with it and it looked cool. I wish I had Helicon Focus when i took these shots.

[Iain]

I wish you still did C&O in N.

[unittrain]

Man those C&O pictures are absolutley stunning  , as far as Ed's layout I agree 100% it is better to simplify design so the enjoyable part of the hobby such as scenery and structures ect can be enjoyed rather than spending several months with bench work ect. I had to build 12 modules and that was not fun I'm just now finishing up wiring and it has been over a year since I started!! Seeing the great layout photos posted on these forums makes me wish I'd done things different and could have already been running trains and building scenery and structures.

[AlkemScaleModels]

I wish you still did C&O in N.

I still am. I still have oNeTRAK C&O Mtn Sub modules. Brian Brendel, Jeff Peck and I plan to continue with the C&O Mtn Sub modules after Matt's death. We have just been too busy to get cranking. We really miss Matt, he really was spark that kept us motivated and on the ball.

But, the C&O Modules will be in Great Model Railroads 2011 (assuming all goes well), though that article will have a touch of fantasy in it.