New MR Project layout

[skytop35]

Hmmmm.....first there are complaints about MR not having enough N content.    Check that off the list. So now the new complaint is about the size of the N scale layout  Haven't you heard size doesn't matter 

[Dave V]

People gotta complain, apparently.  It's a compulsion, I believe.

[peteski]

People gotta complain, apparently.  It's a compulsion, I believe.

Isn't that what online forums are for? 

[GaryHinshaw]

I'm happy to see an N scale project again - kudos to MR for that. 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how that branch line staging yard is supposed to work.  The tail track in there is barely 18" long, so that's the longest train (including locos) that one can haul out of there in one go.  I would be sorely tempted to find a way to join that yard to the main staging, and to make a reversing section out of the branch to add some operational flexibility.

The plan for this layout is much richer than the 4x8 HO scale Cactus Valley they featured 10+ years ago (which I built for my kids and then handed off to Mr. Mann).  That layout had 17" curves (in HO!) and a grand total of 4 turnouts.  It was a fun way for me to get back in the hobby after a long hiatus though.

[wcfn100]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how that branch line staging yard is supposed to work.

The problem is that MR doesn't know the difference between a branch line and an interchange track(watch the video to see what I mean).   

For anyone interested, with the locomotives presented, this layout could only exist between April and May of 1962.


Jason


Jason

[GimpLizard]

Try this link: http://www.kalmbachstore.com/12428.html

DFF

Thanks Dave.

[sirenwerks]

People gotta complain, apparently.  It's a compulsion, I believe.

The thing is, I'm not complaining, I just hope they do something more with it that shows N scale's more than a plop and run scale. You're right that I am over-thinking it, I just wish N scale would build more cred as a modelers' scale so the manufacturers (who produce detail parts, esp.) start taking notiice and treating it with more consideration.

[Chris333]

geeez I hope they do a door layout every year. 

[Scottl]

I can't get a copy, sold out here when I tried to find one.  I'll take that as a positive.

I don't see anything but positive with an n scale project layout.  In general, I find most of the project layouts in all scales (well, HO and N) to be 4X8 or "unit" layouts anyway.  I don't get the "HCD crowd" mantra and actually consider it a bit of defensive reflex that is unnecessary.  A door is just a platform for benchwork, like wood, foam, steel, or whatever.  It is what goes on top that matters to me.  There are some excellent examples of HCD layouts (or better yet, small layouts), and there are some that look like my ping pong table layouts from the 80s- loops of section track on foam!  It is just the n-scale version of the 4 X 8.  There is nothing wrong with it, but nothing particularly special either.

One comment earlier about modelling and scale that got me thinking.  I really see n scale as an operations and landscape scale spatial optima with a good range of equipment options (unlike z scale), while HO and larger provide opportunities for detailed modelling due to size and a broader range of companies supporting with detail parts, range of models, etc.  There are many exceptions and it does not preclude fine modelling in small scales (or clunky in large!), but the different scales have niches and advantages and I think it is in the modelers interest to choose a scale based on what they want to do and what interests them.  I love the reasonably fine scale detailing we see in many n scale products now, but I won't deny that HO is markedly finer and detailed to my eyes.  That G scale boxcar that  was recently posing with in another thread is evidence of the fidelity of the larger scales. 

I model in n for different reasons and can accept the limitations of the scale given the benefits to me.  After seeing some fine TT work in Germany, I'm pretty convinced that it is nearly a perfect scale for almost everything, but the range of equipment is so narrow in North America I would not consider it.  If I was doing a European prototype, well that is another story. 

It's all good.

[High Hood]

The problem is that MR doesn't know the difference between a branch line and an interchange track(watch the video to see what I mean).   

Personally I would prefer a interchange instead of a branch like for this layout.  I think an interchange would add a lot more variety with two roads modeled and you could have a dual served industry or have one industry only served by the interchange road.

I hope sometime MR will put up a video or article over the layout's planned operations.  Maybe if we know how they plan on operating it certain things would make more sense.

Personally the only real problems I have with the layout is all the curved turnouts, but besides that there seems to be a lack of ways to expand.  Now maybe I don't see it but maybe someone else might.

[jwb]

I was thinking more about this thread, and I began to get the idea that an MR project layout is a little like a "concept car" at a car show -- it's a showcase for ideas, but not really something GM or whoever expects anyone actually to drive. It's built in a 6-month period, and some videos and photos are taken showing the MR staff operating it, but basically once the series is published, it either goes into storage or sometimes turns up at a show, and that's about it. There have been some really, really good and inspiring project layouts -- the Clinchfield, the Lou Sassi Housatonic, and the Virginian, for instance -- but a little like concept cars, the thing is the idea, not the whole package.

[conrail98]

I was thinking more about this thread, and I began to get the idea that an MR project layout is a little like a "concept car" at a car show -- it's a showcase for ideas, but not really something GM or whoever expects anyone actually to drive. It's built in a 6-month period, and some videos and photos are taken showing the MR staff operating it, but basically once the series is published, it either goes into storage or sometimes turns up at a show, and that's about it. There have been some really, really good and inspiring project layouts -- the Clinchfield, the Lou Sassi Housatonic, and the Virginian, for instance -- but a little like concept cars, the thing is the idea, not the whole package.

Actually, on the video they said it'll be used to test N scale equipment for product reviews. They were using the Salt Lake Route for that so I wonder what happened to that layout,

Phil

[Dave V]

I was just thinking of the Salt Lake Route as a relatively recent "not-HCD" N scale MR project layout.

That layout was fun to see built as well.  Like it or not, Unitrack is a very popular first layout choice in N scale, and that layout showed what you can do with it.  I'd have liked to have seen a more consistent ballasting/painting job on those tracks, but as I recall it was built on a very tight schedule.  Nevertheless, that layout made a strong case for N scale as the best choice for modeling modern-day railroading.

[Blazeman]

The size of the project layouts is dictated by the necessity of being able to roll them to another room for photo shoots. The VGN layout had two branches that "hooked" on to the main layout with special connectors (got them from UK).

Even the Rice Harbor and Beer Line, which were able to be flipped to be point-to-points had casters to allow being rolled away. Perhaps it's the doorway widths that drive what they do.

I realize they get paid to do what we love to play with, but they do grind out a lot of work week-in and week-out. Wonder if they have enough interest at the end of the day to operate their own layouts?

[CVSNE]

Dave,
Thanks.
I should add the blurb about "build a 4 x 8..." isn't accurate - the layout is actually a little less than 3 x 7 or so.
Marty

I thought I had posted one version of the Androscoggin Central track plan on this forum back when I was building the thing. I was able to locate it on RL, but I did find this thread on Railroad-Line that includes a version of the track plan -
http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22305

Marty