# Minnich's layout 2.0



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Hey guys, 

Good news, I will be moving into the new house within a month and I am very excited. I wanted to show you the space I have to work with this time. 



















From the corner of the wall (near wash sink) to the corner of the house is approximately 16 feet. I am not sure if I am only going to keep it on that wall or go onto the other wall you see there or not. I want to move the sink down the wall further so I can put my helix there so it is not visible from the layout. 

More updates to come, I have been trying to pack up my train stuff little by little, I did not realize how much stuff I had in the basement :goofball:

EDIT: pictures are working now

The layout will be a shelf layout with 2 levels. The first level 30 inches wide and the second level 18 inches wide. 

More updates after the basement is worked on and ready for me to move my stuff in.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Hopefully, by "worked on" you mean that bare concrete covered or painted and a ceiling installed....


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Sort answer, yes

Obviously the previous owner did not finish the basement. So we will be doing a drop ceiling, painting the walls, and covering the floors (I think tile and area rugs). 

I wanted to stud frame the walls and put drywall, but we do not want to have a moisture problem between the drywall and concrete. So I am going to have to figure something else out for attaching the layout to the wall. possible just straight into the concrete wall? I do not know


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

There are many moisture barrier or framing products that will allow you to cover those walls, if you so choose (and the budget allows), without fear of moisture problems. Grab an issue of _Family Handyman_ magazine or similar and you will see several ads for them.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I would like to have a studded basement with drywall and a moisture barrier, but I do not want to have to pay the price when just painting the cement wall will work just fine. Maybe, after we are living there for awhile, we can really make the basement nice and frame it.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Well, just remember that it is MUCH easier to finish a room BEFORE there is a layout in it. But I understand budget and time constraints.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Consider self standing benchwork for your layout. There
is not a great advantage for using the wall as support.

It is much easier to make changes or additions when
you can move the layout. And you won't have the
scars from whatever you use to attach to the wall.

Don


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

http://www.drylok.com/

This is good stuff. It's a bit pricey at $32-35/gallon, depending on where you get it. It comes as water based latex or oil based. For painting over it, wait 24 hours for the latex, 30 days for the oil based. Somehow it seems to me that the oil based would be a better waterproofer, but I'm just guessing. If you can, paint the walls now and most of the smell will be gone by the time you move in. A gallon will cover 75-100 sq. feet.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Small update, no pictures just telling you about some progress on the basement work. 

We took a grinder to the walls to smooth them out and them put a cement plaster to fill the holes. It is so smooth, looks like it is dry walled in my opinion. We also painted the walls. 

Next, we are sealing the floor. Then walls will be put up. Then tiling the floor. Then drop cleaning. Then train..... lots of "then" haha


----------



## Mr.Buchholz (Dec 30, 2011)

flyboy2610 said:


> http://www.drylok.com/
> 
> This is good stuff. It's a bit pricey at $32-35/gallon, depending on where you get it. It comes as water based latex or oil based. For painting over it, wait 24 hours for the latex, 30 days for the oil based. Somehow it seems to me that the oil based would be a better waterproofer, but I'm just guessing. If you can, paint the walls now and most of the smell will be gone by the time you move in. A gallon will cover 75-100 sq. feet.


Been selling Drylok for many years, and let me say this: Don't get the oil based version. If any moisture gets trapped behind it, it will form cracks over time and cause more problems. The water-based Drylock is excellent, as it forms a breathable membrane on the concrete, and will never crack. You will notice it's a lot thicker than normal paint because it is considered a membrane rather than a paint. But.....it's worth the money!

-J.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

hey guys, 

nothing with the layout yet, still moving and working on the basement. Lots going on in life and not enough time to do much of anything. 

Anyway, I was at home depot today to get studs for a wall we are building in the basement. So I was looking at prices for wood for my layout, about $3 for an 8ft 2x4 OR $6 for a 1x3. Is the only reason people go with the 1x3 for weight reduction?? 

Thanks


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Since wood is sold by the board foot (a fictional piece of wood 1" thick and a foot square), pricing for similar species and grades would normally be higher for the thicker lumber (i.e. 8' 2x4). All else being equal, an 8' 1x4 should be about half the price of a 2x4. I suspect that you're comparing prices for the garbage 2x4 that home improvement centers typically sell for "framing boards" with higher grade common or clear pine intended for woodworking.

Since you don't need the strength of a 2x4 (which, as you've probably noticed, is used for framing houses), most people opt for the cheaper 1x cuts. If the weight and bulk is not an issue, then go with price. If you're going to hide or paint your benchwork, quality of the lumber doesn't matter much. It if will be more of a finished piece of furniture, then you may want to opt for the better quality boards.


----------



## deedub35 (Jan 29, 2014)

If you are building a wall of course use a 2x4. They are cheaper and stronger than a 1x3. 

If you are insulating then the batt insulation will fit perfectly between the 2x4s. With 3" lumber you will compress the insulation and it will lose R-value.

If you are running electrical 3" lumber might not give enough depth for the outlet boxes.

Also, if you are drywalling it's easier to attach to a 2x4 than a 1x3. Your target is 1.5" wide as compared to 0.75" wide.

But for bench work then what CT says - go thin and light. 1x3.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

School has started and we just finished moving. We started working on the basement, so that will be what I am doing for the next few weekends. Then I can start the layout when I have the chance. 

We have discussed the type of wood to use for the layout multiple times in multiple threads. I have done my research and decided to use 2x3s for the majority of the bench work. 
-Not the 1x3/4 because of the cost. My Home Depot and Lowes only sell furniture grade dimensional lumber and it is almost $10 for an 8 foot board. That would get expensive.
-Not 2x4 because I do not need the extra weight of the wood. Sure it is not that much different than the 2x3s I will be using, but every little bit counts toward weight. It also costs like $2.50 for a kiln dried 8 foot board.

If you have a concern with using 2x3s, let me know, but I think it is my best choice for my wallet and the strength it will provide. 

Lets finally talk about the layout itself. I have a picture below showing the room with the dimensions of what I have to work with. I would like to keep the desk where I have it and keep the layout on the opposite wall. That wall is an exterior wall, we grinded all the walls smooth, filled in the holes, sealed the wall and painted the wall. I will not be attaching the layout to the wall either. 

Here is my layout plan, tell me your honest opinion. I am also doing this away is it is easier to move later down the road. The plan is to make multiple 4 foot by 2.5 foot tables (somewhat like modular) If I decide to change the elevation of the layout at different points, I can just make the legs longer for that section of table. 

I am not sure if I want to do multiple levels of bench work, but for now I am just going to focus on the main level with the thought of a second level in the works. That mainly depends on if I have the room for the trains to get from one level to the next (helix, gradual slope... something)

Here is what I would like to here from you; how would you use that space that I have? I have some ideas but nothing that I really like so far. The table sizes can be changed if your idea would require it. 

If you have an idea, post it and I will draw it out and see what I think about it. 

Thanks for reading


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

Its not clear from your drawing where the door into the room is. I expect that will have some impact on the layout. Also, what kind of layout are you primarily looking for? Do you want long continuous runs or more of a shelf type switching layout? Do you want a storage yard and if so, hidden or visible?

Mark


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

The room does not have a door, the "enterance" to the room is right after you get down the steps. I would like to keep the layout away from the enterance, but it could be somewhat along that wall. I can post a picture later, I am on my phone right now. 

The closet area has a door, it will be that the top of the rectangle how it is in the picture, again I'll show it better in the next picture post. 

As for the layout. I am thinking more shelf type layout and with a hidden staging under the layout. Possibly a small yard on the layout. I would like to have the whole 15 foot wall as layout plus some.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

sorry for the double post, but here is an updated picture. Sorry I should have included all this the first time. The doors are those orange things (sorry my hands are not very steady on a mouse pad) and the blue is my thoughts for train table (one level only)


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Where do you get 2x3 lumber? Other than ripping a 2x6 in half on a table saw, I don't know that I've ever seen it.

Off the shelf 1x lumber is plenty strong enough. Why not use that?


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

I spent about an hour looking through track plans hoping something would jump out that I could recommend. I had a good time doing that, but I've come to the conclusion that you need to come up with at least something that you like as a starting point that you can then ask for advice about from the forum members here. There's just too many variables and personal preferences each of us has.

If you held a gun to my head and demanded a plan, I'd say take a look at a plan called "Saranac & Wolf Pond". I found it in "101 More Track Plans for Model Railroaders", page 28. Its in Model Railroader's online plan database if you have access to that. If you Google it, you'll also see it listed in a couple other books. As published, its 6 x 16.5 feet, but I think it could be shortened in length. It has both a continuous run dogbone mainline and a somewhat complex switching track layout too. Sorry about not posting a picture, but I'm sensitive to copyright rules. Hope that might get you started with some possibilities.

Mark


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> Where do you get 2x3 lumber? Other than ripping a 2x6 in half on a table saw, I don't know that I've ever seen it.
> 
> Off the shelf 1x lumber is plenty strong enough. Why not use that?


I understand that the 1x lumber is plenty strong enough, I just do not see the reason for spending almost 5x more on the benchwork on lighter 1x lumber than just getting 2x lumber. I understand that it will be heavier, but there really aren't anymore negatives for using 2x lumber for the benchwork. Some people say that it is harder to cut and drill into than 1x lumber, but I have all the tools to easily do whatever it is that I need to do to build the benchwork. 

My local Home Depot has some weird things in stock, including 2x3 lumber. I will probably go there tonight to pick some up just so that they do not sell it all and they do not order more of it. 



Mark VerMurlen said:


> I spent about an hour looking through track plans hoping something would jump out that I could recommend. I had a good time doing that, but I've come to the conclusion that you need to come up with at least something that you like as a starting point that you can then ask for advice about from the forum members here. There's just too many variables and personal preferences each of us has.
> 
> If you held a gun to my head and demanded a plan, I'd say take a look at a plan called "Saranac & Wolf Pond". I found it in "101 More Track Plans for Model Railroaders", page 28. Its in Model Railroader's online plan database if you have access to that. If you Google it, you'll also see it listed in a couple other books. As published, its 6 x 16.5 feet, but I think it could be shortened in length. It has both a continuous run dogbone mainline and a somewhat complex switching track layout too. Sorry about not posting a picture, but I'm sensitive to copyright rules. Hope that might get you started with some possibilities.
> 
> Mark


Mark thanks for looking, when I asked for suggestions, I was not excepting someone to take the time to look for more than like 5 mins haha. Thank you though. 

I will try and find a picture of the layout you have suggested that I check out. I do not have that book, but maybe someone has posted a picture of their own layout online that I could look at and see if it is something I want to pursue. 

Thanks again


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

I got 2x3s at Lowes and they made great legs for my center table.
Don't know if they have these on a regular basis.

Magic


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Magic said:


> I got 2x3s at Lowes and they made great legs for my center table.
> Don't know if they have these on a regular basis.
> 
> Magic


Interesting. If they're cheaper, then by all means use them. Since wood is sold by the board foot, a thicker piece is almost always more expensive than a thinner one of the same width and length.

If you're finding wood that doesn't follow that general rule, it's probably really cruddy stuff (warped or excessive loose knots) or it's a non-standard item that they're trying to move.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I was thinking the same thing, I thought there was no way the wood would be in good shape. I was wrong, I went to Lowe's 2 nights ago and their 2x3 selection is very good, straight, some knots not but a ton. 

I will for sure be using the 2x3, just need the time to build my benchwork. and design my track plan.

Here is a CAD drawing of my modular bench work I have in mind. 










The top and middle will have plywood on top of the 2x3's. It is 48" tall, 48'' long, 30" wide. 

Each section will be carriage bolted together. 

I am not sure about a hidden staging area yet, If I have one it will be underneath the layout. So I would have another shelf about 10'' below the main layout. 

Do you see any problems with this? Do you think it will be strong enough? Do you think I will need a diagonal piece to keep it from moving (I do not think so, the plywood should keep it rigid)


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

If it's not going to be portable, then that will be fine.

If you're going to move it, use 1x lumber for everything but the legs.

One thing you might consider -- either put another piece of plywood over that bottom bracing to serve as a shelf, or install X bracing higher up, and remove the lower box structure. I don't know about you, but I use every inch of space under my layout for storage. That would also make it easier to work under the layout (although you're young and agile, so maybe not a problem; me, I have to use a creeper or I'm not going under the layout).


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I did say that the top section an the bottom bracing were going to have plywood. The top to serve as the table itself and the bottom as a shelf. I do not really want to keep things on the floor to pick up the dampness from the concrete (for now) floor. 

As for the benchwork. Yes, it will be staying in this basement for now, but later on, it will be moving. When I say modular layout, I do not mean a layout that is traveling monthly to different shows and stuff like that. I am sticking to the 2x3 and thats that. 

My plan is to make a somewhat modular layout so that when I move out, I can take the sections of layout (4'x2.5' sections) that I really like and use them. Maybe the sections I do not particularly like I will not keep. I do not know. But I have moved plenty of times and I know that I will be moving again (outta of my parents house, and for the people that do not know my age, like CTV, I am not an older man still living in his mommies basement...)

I hope this makes sense. I really do understand why you recommend 1x lumber so much. But for my application, I am choosing 2x3 lumber. 

Next step to track planning.... Fun times


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Aminnich said:


> I did say that the top section an the bottom bracing were going to have plywood.


Sorry, i missed that you were planning to put plywood on the bottom as well. Speed kill.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

So after my last topic I started, I decided to at least look at the space I have available and what I have to fill that space. I am figuring the space to be 6' by 16', which I thought was a lot of room, but really it isn't much more than what I had before, which is totally fine. The problem is that I have a bunch of large buildings (lumber mill, paper plant, coal mines). Just those 3 industries will fill up the area rather quickly. I figured that the lumber and paper mills would good together because one serves the other.

My plan was a 2.5' shelf style layout with 24" minimum radius. I had originally planned for a second level for the layout so that I would have more space to work with, so I am debating trying that and seeing if that would be better. 

My biggest problem is the size of the buildings. Before someone says it, I will address it now, I would rather NOT cut the buildings up. 

I downloaded anyrail and started mess around with what I could do with just one level. 


Let me know what you think of this, it is just an idea, not final


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

I would move the crossover on the lower track farther to the right and add another on the left side. This will give you a run-around track. If the coal mine is a trailing point siding, meaning the cars are backed into the mine, then the lumber yard will be a facing point siding, meaning the cars will be pushed into the siding. You basically have one loop of track, which leaves no way for the locomotive to get behind the car to push it into the lumber yard, without going around the entire loop. Doing as I suggested with the crossovers will allow the locomotive get behind the car and drop it off at the lumber yard.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

so something like this



I feel like if I keep it one level, the layout will be very busy and things will be too close if I included everything I want to. So I either have to not included everything, or add a second level


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

I can't see the pic.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

You could see the first one, but not the second one!?!? I did it the same way. I will try and fix it when I get home.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

FWIW, I can't see either of them.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

No way a layout can be "too busy". Trust me.


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

Aminnich, I got your PM. Yes, I can see the picture now.
Yes, that is what I was talking about. Now you can drop a car between the crossovers, the loco can go through both of them, and come up behind the car and push it up to the lumber yard.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> FWIW, I can't see either of them.


I think I have the picture problem fixed, let me know if you can not see them, please. 



time warp said:


> No way a layout can be "too busy". Trust me.


I hate seeing a cramped layout. It is a personal preference of mine. 



flyboy2610 said:


> Aminnich, I got your PM. Yes, I can see the picture now.
> Yes, that is what I was talking about. Now you can drop a car between the crossovers, the loco can go through both of them, and come up behind the car and push it up to the lumber yard.


Thanks for checking, I hope everyone else can see the pictures. As for the layout, this is just an idea of what I could do. I have another idea that I am going to build on anyrail and post later today.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Yep, working now!

I think you could have a lot of fun with that second one. Due to the double crossovers, it can even be run in either direction.

I understand what you mean about trying to cram too much track into a small space. Might be right for some, but doesn't suit my taste either.

Since your time is limited right now, you might want to scale back and only build something this size. Let's see that other plan you're developing!


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

What about this one? 











I am trying to keep 24 inch radius as a minimum, but I might go smaller so I can fit a little more. 

QUESTION: what is the smallest radius the Kato SD80MAC engines can handle? 22in?
http://www.modeltrainforum.com/showthread.php?t=96698

I would rather keep it to one level. mainly because a helix would be required and a helix would take up a lot of room of each level. So I am not sure that it would really give me extra room.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

I was talking about buildings and scenery, not trackage.
If I may:
The only real problem with the track plans you've posted is they lack a long passing siding. The short runaround track is an excellent addition, but you also should double track the area where you're sidings are placed, a long enough run to handle a long train. You will not regret it.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

time warp said:


> I was talking about buildings and scenery, not trackage.
> If I may:
> The only real problem with the track plans you've posted is they lack a long passing siding. The short runaround track is an excellent addition, but you also should double track the area where you're sidings are placed, a long enough run to handle a long train. You will not regret it.


Are you referring to post #37 or the track plan before?


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

Both, actually. The earlier one having the short runaround track, of course.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I will have to figure some way to get a double mainline in there without the curves being too tight.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

Probably would work out to 20 - 21" radius.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

But will my Katos be able to run on 20" curves?


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

I wouldn't know. You could always mock up a 20" curve and try.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Google is my friend, SD80MAC engines from Kato run on an 18" radius. Now I am sure that is at a crawl, but that gives me a good idea of the extreme minimum radius I can have.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

Now we all know!


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Last track idea of the night, based off of the last one, the radius was decreased to 20" using #6 turnouts along the mainline.










The biggest problem I am seeing is that the ovals are more than 4 feet wide, my arms cannot quite stretch that far. But that is what I can get to work with the wye turnout. I will have to try something different


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

That's more like it. That passing siding will make a huge difference operationally. :thumbsup:


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

You can fix the reach problem with either an access hatch in the middle, or get s topside creeper (what auto mechanics use to reach into the center of an engine bay).


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I have been looking through more and more track plans online to get different ideas of what I could do. For all of the plans I have posted so far, the wye turnout is massive and takes up and a lot of room, and I have 2 of them. 

I am finding 2 things during my research; wishbone layouts and point to point layouts. 

The wishbone is good, but I would still need some kind of wye turnout for the layout. The point to point uses up the available space the best but does not provide the opportunity to just run the train around in a loop. 

Am I missing a different way to turn an entire train around at once other than a wye?


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

This is a quick sketch of a dogbone, or water wings shaped layout. Just an idea, but I've drawn in two passing sidings and a reverse section at "A". I personally would forget about the reversing section, but to each his own.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Thanks time warp. 

I can never make up my mind when it comes to track planning. As of now, I am trying to get an idea of the benchwork I need to build, then once that is done, I can not (as easily) make major changes to the track plan I decided on. 

I hope to post another track plan tonight, double main line wishbone with some kind of reverse somewhere in some way shape or form.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

You may be over thinking things. Don't be afraid to tack down some track and run trains for a while to see if you like it. You can always change or modify to suit.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I am always over thinking things, I just want something that will do what I want it to.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Here is what I have so far. Majority double mainline. Ran out of time to work on the rest of the track planning, I should get back and do some homework. 










Again, the biggest problem is the reach into the corners.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

I really like that last layout design. 

One thing of caution.. I saw a few pages ago you looked up the curve radius your engine can travel around... don't take that as gospel, many times that is not entirely correct. Someone once told me that you can never really tell which specific piece of stock will work on any give layout until you try it.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Thanks pat, I am still working on finishing that plan. 

As for the engine, the website said 18" curves, but I am not going any smaller than 20". If I notice a problem with the tack, I can always change it.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Aminnich said:


> Here is what I have so far. Majority double mainline. Ran out of time to work on the rest of the track planning, I should get back and do some homework.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wouldn't let the reach bother you too much. There are ways around it. See my previous post above.

I think you've got good potential there, although perhaps too ambitious given that a week ago you were thinking of giving up the hobby due to insufficient time to work on it.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I did read your post on how to be able to reach an unreachable area. I think a pop out section would be best for me. 

And yes I agree with you that this is a bit ambitious. And I thought that as soon as I finished the layout. Not only do I not have the time to be working on something like this, but I'll be moving out sooner or later and the layout will have to go too (probably) So maybe I should scale way down or just wait to build a layout. 

I am on the fence here on what to do.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

I recently moved and ended up just trashing my old setup. I advise that if you are even remotely thinking you will be moving in the next couple years do a much scaled down layout... one that snaps together is good too. And use carriage bolts for key locations.. so you can take it apart into several large sections easily.

Maybe do a more simple dog bone layout with two (or three) sections that can be separated...this will get you something to run, have fun with.. and will keep the build time lower and be more movable when the time comes... you could still spend as much or little time as you like on it (doing trees and scenery) but you would still be able to get a layout up and running with less time commitment.. so if you don't feel like working on it, or can't.. it is no big deal because you have a running setup already.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

i have moved my own layouts about 3 times now, every time they get bigger, I don't know why, but they do. And every time they are the same difficulty to move. I use carriage bolts to keep things together and simply take them apart to move. With this layout, I was going to make the sections much smaller and even easier to move. Approx 2' x 4' sections. 

This layout is way too big for the timeline from now (or from when I start) until I move out. And whenever I end up, the dimensions of the room will be different and the layout will be changed anyway. So I am going to down scale this layout is be about the size of the last layout. 

I am about to go into a Chem exam, so wish me luck!


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Got a 90% on that Chem test, not too shabby. 

This evening I decided to get out all the structures I could find after moving, I think I have most of them included in the pictures. 

I did this to get an idea of what I have and what I want to include on the layout. I am going to start a track plan from scratch tomorrow and build 4 sections of benchwork so I have an idea of how big I want to the layout to be. I do not want the room to get too cramped and just by looking at the AnyRail files, you cannot quite tell. 

Also, I am deciding to stick with the general U-shape layout. It seems like it is really big on AnyRail, but it is actually less square footage than my last layout by 5sq ft. 

Anyway, here are most of the structures I have. The ones in boxes (except the oil transfer) are not built. 

*My first buildings, terribly build. some are built inside out, all have terrible glue joints. :thumbsdown:*









*The rest are either built by me or were bought from a lot that was posted on the forum*























































I want to include all the lumber buildings for sure (top priority) 
Then the paper mill, mainly because the lumber builds supply the paper company 
The either a) coal mine b) gravel pit (I would actually make a pit

I would like to include the curved bridge, but I do not know how to incorporate it into my layout as of now. 

This weekend I want to get something built, even if it is just benchwork.

*BTW* If you see anything here you would be interested in, that I did not just mention, PM me, maybe we could make something happen for you!


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

Looking forward to seeing what you decide to incorporate and what track plan you settle on.

Mark


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I agree. You should have plenty to keep you occupied for the time being, and lots of potential for expansion later. Keep us posted.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

So I told you I was going to work on benchwork over the weekend, but you did not get an update Sunday night, that is because I messed up and instead of measuring twice and cutting once... I measured twice and cut twice. I messed up the plywood for the bottom shelf. 

Anyway, I built the 2 sections of the layout. I will build the middle section once the wall (you can see the studs to the left of the picture) is completely finished. Once the wall is up, I will know how long the middle section can be. I am not sure if I want a narrow path on either side of the layout or if I am going to try a lift out section yet. 

The benchwork is "modular" but not. The table on the left of the picture is 4'x6' and is made up of 2 2'x6' sections. The table on the right is 4'x9' and is made up of 4 2'x4.5' tables. Each section is carriage bolted together with a wing nut is that it is easy to take apart and move if need be. 

Here are some pictures. I should have taken them before I put all my stuff on the shelf and on top. Sorry for the mess. 




























Next step is cutting the rigid pink foam I have left from the last layout and gluing it down. Then finalize a track plan and print it out, get the roadbed and glue it down.. etc etc

I decided to keep the lumber mill and paper mill as one company. The wood chips from the lumber mill will feed directly into the paper mill and the log pile will be shared between the two buildings. 










For the middle section of the benchwork, I will be building some kind of shelving unit instead of a shelf. These shelves will hold all of the cardboard trays I have all over the place and make things I little bit more organized. 

Also, the right side benchwork is holding a lot of the leftover foam I had from the last layout. Once the scenery is done for this layout, all that foam will either be used or thrown away so I can store my stuff a little bit more organized. 

Sorry for the long post, but I had a bunch to share.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

Good design on the trackplan. I was going to suggest you pulling that track down a bit from the upper RH corner, and I see you've done it already. Looks good. Keep up the momentum!:thumbsup:


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Definitely a good start!

For access, if you can leave a little room to squeeze in, and you aren't old, creaky, and slightly overweight like me, you'll find that more convenient than a lift-out.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Thanks guys! 

I am thinking that too CTV. I am a thin/tall guy, so I can fit into a narrow path to get to the unreachable spots. Even it the path is a foot wide, I could get by without a problem. 

So if I do a foot on both sides, that means that the middle section will be 5' long and probably 3' wide. The layout would be against the back wall so 3' is the maximum for the middle section. 

Also, I forgot to mention. The height on the layout is 45" so with the 2" rigid foam it is closer to 47" plus the thickness of the plywood.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Aminnich said:


> Thanks guys!
> 
> I am thinking that too CTV. I am a thin/tall guy, so I can fit into a narrow path to get to the unreachable spots. Even it the path is a foot wide, I could get by without a problem.
> 
> ...


Your call -- but you have my advice. 

I think 47" is a good height. My benchwork is at 46", so "ground level" is 48".


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

Mess? What mess? Looks like a normal train room to me!! :laugh::laugh:


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

It's a mess haha 

Worked on cutting the foam to size after I got home from class, I have the left side of tables drying now. I should be able to get the other side done tomorrow. 

Then I have to finish this track plan and order some track. 

Micro engineering flex track OR Atlas flex track?? 

Walthers turnouts or atlas?

Now that I think about it, we already talked about that in this or my other layout topic, I can't remember. 

Micro engineering track with walthers turnouts was a favorite if I remember correctly. Is that still the consensus? If so, does code 100 ME track work well with code 100 walthers turnouts?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

flyboy2610 said:


> Mess? What mess? Looks like a normal train room to me!! :laugh::laugh:


It's in his parents' basement. It is, therefore, by definition, a mess! 



Aminnich said:


> Micro engineering flex track OR Atlas flex track??
> 
> Walthers turnouts or atlas?
> 
> ...


I use ME flex track with Walthers turnouts, but I'd hardly call it a consensus. ME flex, especially, is a love-it-or-hate-it kind of thing. Most brands of flex track (Atlas) are springy. They form nice smooth curves, but they will move on you if not well fastened, especially when the adhesive is curing. ME, on the other hand, has to be formed into shape and the positioning of the ties tweaked, but once done, it stays that way. There are advantages either way; it's largely a matter of personal preference.

I would recommend using Code 83 instead of 100. There is more variety in the available turnouts. The ME pieces (in code 83, anyway) are just a bit finer than the Walthers, but not enough to cause problems if you don't plan on using the rail joiners to hold everything in place.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> It's in his parents' basement. It is, therefore, by definition, a mess!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My parents are not allowed to comment on the messiness of that area of the basement. They told me that was my area, so I can keep it as messy as I want, right? haha 

The used flex track I had before was stiff and a pain to shape. Now that might have been because of it being used and not in the best shape, but I do not know. I think deciding between ME and Atlas will depend on if there is much of a price difference. I searched online last night and found that some train guys swear by ME track. So if there is not that much of a price difference, then I will try out the ME flex track. 

As for code 100 vs code 83, I was not sure. I have used 100 in the past so I figured just to use it again. What is the difference?

I would like to use rail joiners, so is ME code 83 and walthers turnouts code 83 not a good match?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Aminnich said:


> My parents are not allowed to comment on the messiness of that area of the basement. They told me that was my area, so I can keep it as messy as I want, right? haha


Nice try. They're still paying the mortgage.



Aminnich said:


> The used flex track I had before was stiff and a pain to shape. Now that might have been because of it being used and not in the best shape, but I do not know. I think deciding between ME and Atlas will depend on if there is much of a price difference. I searched online last night and found that some train guys swear by ME track. So if there is not that much of a price difference, then I will try out the ME flex track.
> 
> As for code 100 vs code 83, I was not sure. I have used 100 in the past so I figured just to use it again. What is the difference?
> 
> I would like to use rail joiners, so is ME code 83 and walthers turnouts code 83 not a good match?


"Stiff and a pain to shape" describes ME flex track. Personally, I like it that way, because once shaped, it's shaped. Like I said, it's a personal thing; some love it, some hate it.

Code is the height of the rails in thousandths of an inch. Most people think code 83 better approximates the scale of heavy mainline rail, and often use even small codes for branch lines / sidings. Performance wise, there is no difference, unless you have some really old equipment with really deep flanges.

Rail joiners will work, but depending on which brand, they may be either too loose on the ME or too tight on the Walthers. Nothing you can't work through, although I don't recommend relying on rail joiners to maintain either alignment or connectivity.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> "Stiff and a pain to shape" describes ME flex track. Personally, I like it that way, because once shaped, it's shaped. Like I said, it's a personal thing; some love it, some hate it.
> 
> Code is the height of the rails in thousandths of an inch. Most people think code 83 better approximates the scale of heavy mainline rail, and often use even small codes for branch lines / sidings. Performance wise, there is no difference, unless you have some really old equipment with really deep flanges.
> 
> Rail joiners will work, but depending on which brand, they may be either too loose on the ME or too tight on the Walthers. Nothing you can't work through, although I don't recommend relying on rail joiners to maintain either alignment or connectivity.


I saw a video of a guy shaping ME track with some kind of track shaping tool, have you used it before? do you know if it works? If ME track is going to be the same experience as the old track I used, then there is no way I want to deal with that. If there is a tool to make it easier, awesome. 

As for rail, I think code 100 will be better for me. I looked through what kinds of turnouts are available for each and code has more of what I need, maybe I just missed the code 83, I do not know. 

I used rail joiners in the past and they worked pretty well. This time I will be soldering joins relying on rail jointers mainly where the tables would disconnect. A small (probably 4 inches) of track will be removed when the tables are taken apart. This is mainly so that I do not have track coming right up to the edge of the track for something to snag it and rip it off the layout. 

UPDATE:
In between classes today I drew out a track plan and I just made it on AnyRail. Tell me what you think. A mountain would be going in the back left corner for the coal mine. 



















For the middle section, I am still planning on the engine house for between in the main lines and a small industry in the front. 

I hope you guys like it


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Assuming it's the same video, the guy is using a track straightening tool from the JTT Products track tools kit. The company is out of business, but there is still some stock around at vendors.

It does work a little better than shaping by hand, because you can get small, incremental turns in an entire piece of flex track at once, rather than a bit at a time. I would recommend investing in a couple of turn radii gauges to help you make nice, smooth curves.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

This video is how I am going to be copying my track plan onto the benchwork. This guy is very informative on how to do a lot of different model railroad techniques and I really like this one. 






I will glue it down where the track is, cut the rest of the paper off, then glue the roadbed to the paper plans. 

So, I do not think I will need the curve gauges. Plus, I did not use specific curves for the track plan I did. I only set minimum curves so nothing is uniform. 

I think Atlas flex track might be the way to go, if I did not like the old track I had because of shaping it, then I am not going to like shaping ME track.


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

I use Atlas code 100 flex track and have been totally satisfied with it.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

flyboy2610 said:


> I use Atlas code 100 flex track and have been totally satisfied with it.


I

I was just at my LHS and checked out ME track vs Atlas. The ME track is just like what I do before and did not like it. The Atlas is much better. I think I am going to stick with Atlas for flex track and most likely walthers turnouts. 

How do walthers turnouts compare to Atlas turnouts? 

Also, (looking at only Atlas) the track has black ties and the turnouts have brown ties. Do they make the turnouts with black ties?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Aminnich said:


> I
> 
> I was just at my LHS and checked out ME track vs Atlas. The ME track is just like what I do before and did not like it. The Atlas is much better. I think I am going to stick with Atlas for flex track and most likely walthers turnouts.
> 
> ...


It isn't better, it's different. You prefer it. I thought you might.

There is no comparison between Atlas turnouts and Walthers. I would avoid Atlas; Peco or Walthers are fine.

For some reason, even though all the other manufacturers have realized wood ties are actually brown, Atlas continues to make its Code 100 track (onely, their code 83 is brown) with black ties. Everyone else uses brown. Either accept it as is, or paint it (it's pretty easy to paint track. Mask the tops of the rails and use a rattle can or airbrush).


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> It isn't better, it's different. You prefer it. I thought you might.
> 
> There is no comparison between Atlas turnouts and Walthers. I would avoid Atlas; Peco or Walthers are fine.
> 
> For some reason, even though all the other manufacturers have realized wood ties are actually brown, Atlas continues to make its Code 100 track (onely, their code 83 is brown) with black ties. Everyone else uses brown. Either accept it as is, or paint it (it's pretty easy to paint track. Mask the tops of the rails and use a rattle can or airbrush).


I do not have a problem painting the track to make it look better. Would it just be best do paint the final track? Or paint each piece? I would think painting the turnouts would be good too so everything matches, but then I do not want to mess up the mechanics of the turnout with paint.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I would not paint the turnouts. That's asking for trouble. A decent shade of Chocolate brown should be a close enough match.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Sorry in advance. After rereading this, I found the post turned more into a rant than an update, so if you do not want to read my problems, I am warning you now click off haha. Thanks

Hey guys, 

So it has been a while since I have posted... life has been busy. 

I have been working on getting the basement ready to go now for a while and my section is finally done. The floor is down, the walls are up and all is good, right? Nope. 

My parents do not know how to make up their mind and changed the dimension of the room, again. Yes, I know it is their house and they can do whatever they want, but still. This is really starting to irritate me. I started putting the tables together that I had laying around for about 2 months and they do not fit in the room like they should have. 

So I now have to rebuild the tables to fit into the area. Not a problem, right? Nope. Where I was going to have a center peninsula is going to be too narrow for aisles on either side... so I have to redo my track plan, again. 

At this point, I am restarting from scratch and doing it with the walls up and not letting any changes happen to the dimensions of the room. 

Every time I go down there to work on it, I think I just have to restart instead of dealing with what I have right now. 

So that's where I am at. 

I have all kinds of cool train stuff downstairs ready to be used and it is just collecting dust. And for the people that move as often as I do, a lot of things are broken and need to be fixed, but I want to get the benchwork up so I have a place to work. 

Thanks for reading, and lets go Pats!


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

You have two problems as far as I am concerned:

The first was starting to build before you had a completed design, and by extension, before the actual space was finalized. 

And secondly, you live in SE PA and you were voting for the Patriots. Shame on you! I guess that's to balance out me... I live in New England, and have been waiting about 45 years for last night! Those freakin' Eagles FINALLY won a Superbowl! And against the Pats, no less.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

That's the biggest problem, but now that the space is finalized, I can redo everything again. It's just irritating 

As for the ball game... I was rooting for whoever was playing the eagles all season. I'm really surprised at the outcome of the game.

For future reference for me: the space I have now is 151" by 109"


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

deleted


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

So, I am on spring break... and it is already halfway over. And tonight I will be plowing 10 inches of snow  

Anyway... I thought I would show you what I have been working on since I am on break. 

I went through what I have and decided to focus on having that kind of stuff on the layout as a priority. I have been collecting Reading coal cars, so the coal mine was a must on the layout. And I wanted the lumber mill and company included. The paper mill will be cut up to fit into the corner of the layout and the engine facility will work out in the area given. 

I am really excited about this layout. I will be redoing the benchwork from scratch, hopefully it is somewhat nice out tomorrow that I can get everything cut outside (less mess inside the better)

Anyway, here is the track plan. I hope you like it.


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

Just a couple of observations on your plan. 

Do you plan to have the 2 tracks between the main table fingers be lift outs or will you be ducking under them? The aisles you have appear to be a bit less than 2 ft. That's pretty tight for most people, especially if you have to duck under and come up into that aisle. 

If you aren't already aware, this plan has a reverse loop in it. I can't recall if you're planning to use DC or DCC power. Either way, you'll need to handle the polarity issues involved with a reversing loop. If you aren't aware of this and need some help with how to handle it, let us know.

Lastly, it appears you're using AnyRail software and its warning you about certain curves being tighter than you've specified for it to warn you about. Might want to double check what radiuses you've specified for those warnings and if you want to fix those warnings.

You may also have issues with reaching certain portions of this layout unless you have a very long reach. Even so, its hard to work precisely on scenery or other details when you're at full reach.

Overall, it looks like an interesting layout to me.

Mark


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Mark VerMurlen said:


> Just a couple of observations on your plan.
> 
> Do you plan to have the 2 tracks between the main table fingers be lift outs or will you be ducking under them? The aisles you have appear to be a bit less than 2 ft. That's pretty tight for most people, especially if you have to duck under and come up into that aisle.
> 
> ...


First, thanks for your comment, I appreciate small tips on a track plan before laying the track, its very helpful. 

The bridged sections will be lift out sections on 1x6 boards. I may cut down on the width of the middle section a tiny bit to add to the aisle spacing, but I think the 22" aisles should be enough. 

I am aware of the reverse loop, that was one of things I really wanted in the track plan. This does not mean that I am an expert on the subject matter and I will be asking questions about it when it comes time to wire. 

I set the AnyRail constraint a little higher than the recommended radius for the engines I have. All of the radii on the track plan are within the acceptable range. 


Regarding the reach... i'll figure it out when it comes time  The reach is not too crazy, but you are right, doing scenery while having to reach a distance could be a challenge. 

Thanks again for your comment


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

The problem with a reversing loop is you really need two reversing loops.

You enter the reversing loop going counter clockwise and exit going clockwise.
You now have no way to reverse back to CCW operation without backing the train
all the way around the loop.

Magic


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

oh crap, I forgot about that. I am going to have to figure out how to implement a wye into the track plan.... they take up soo much valuable space though!


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

You have such a large center island in your layout plan that I think that would be the best place to try to put a Wye. You might be able to do it coming off your lumber mill spur.

Mark


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

wouldnt I need a double wye to get full ability to turn the train around coming from either direction?


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

updated version


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

A Wye can be entered from either direction, so you should only need one. The next question is do you want to turn the full train or is uncoupling and turning just the locomotive sufficient? If you're running a caboose or FRED on the end of your train, then you'd also have to move that from one end to the other if you don't turn the whole train. If you want to turn the whole train, what will be the typical length of your trains? The Wye will have to accommodate the full train length in that case.

Here are a couple ideas for where to put your Wye:








The red Wye addition is better suited to turning just the locomotive. Its likely what I've drawn is too tight of a curve and you will need to broaden it and probably displace a building or two.

The blue Wye addition could handle a train that's over 6 ft long. The blue addition could also be done in some slightly different ways depending on if and how you want it to connect into your yard area. It does impact your Engine House area to a large degree.

Perhaps there are other options too, but these were the 2 that first came to mind.

Mark


----------



## Mark VerMurlen (Aug 15, 2015)

Looks like you solved it yourself while I was drawing my proposal. You've essentially added a Wye into the mainline which means you'll be able to turn fairly long trains. Nice solution.

Mark


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Mark VerMurlen said:


> View attachment 419153
> 
> Mark


I actually did try something like the blue wye before handle. It would be nice to come out of the staging area in either direction, but I could not get a decent turning radius to go the opposite direction. Plus, as you said, it would take away the engine most likely entirely. 

The red Wye is a good idea, but the radius would be extremely tight and I would have to change a lot of things around. 

I have another idea, I will post it once I am done with it (If it works out)

EDIT: Didnt work


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

So this past weekend I spent some time working on the benchwork so I could slowly working on laying track over the next couple weekends. I did everything around the perimeter first, then realized that I am not sure how wide I really want the middle section to be, 48" might be too wide and will affect the aisles. SO I will have to figure that out later. 

I am really happy with how this turned out. I hope you like it!  

Here is kind of a panorama shot of the area I have to work with.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I got the middle section built and all the foam down. I did decide to make the middle a little bit narrower for wider aisles. Now onto the next step. 

Looking for wiring recommendations: I am thinking to put the main power connection on the end of the middle section, how would you run the wires (what directions). I posted a picture of what I would do below.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

That will work fine. Then add your feeders. My personal opinion is that this can be overdone -- one every 8 feer is more than enough.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

CTValleyRR said:


> That will work fine. Then add your feeders. My personal opinion is that this can be overdone -- one every 8 feer is more than enough.


I figured a feeder every 2 full sections of flex track, so about every 6'.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I guess this is a chance to revive another thread. 

I decided to cut out the middle section of the benchwork that I originally had to make things easier to move around and such. This meant I had to redo part of the track plan I had from before, so I jumped on AnyRail. 

My main goals are you use up as many of the buildings that I have laying around with lots of opportunity to switch trains. I decided on having a single mainline with multiple spurs. Because the benchwork is modular, I wanted to be sure turnouts and crossovers were not on a point of disconnect on the tables. This will make taking the tables apart and such much easier (I hope) in the long run. 

As of now, I have the lumber and coal mine areas done. I am not a huge fan of crowding an area, so some of these buildings may not end up in these spots. 

The glacier gravel is an idea. I do not like how there is a lot of open area under the building, but putting it there allows me to have a gravel pit where the tan color is with a conveyor going into the building. I am just not sure what to do about the open area below the build itself. The gravel mine will be at a lower elevation than the rest of the benchwork. the way the benchwork is setup, it can only go there. 

The papermill, I need to start cutting up those buildings to see how they are going to fit best. I want it to take up that back corner pretty well. 

The 1' wide area beyond the gravel mine is TBD with some ideas listed. 

The track that is not on the benchwork will be a liftout section. I added this so I could have a loop with manageable curves. 

You guys always have such great feedback on track plans. Let me know what you think of this, comment any concerns you have and so ideas of what I could do better. As of now, I have some flex track ordered and a few turnouts to mess around with. But until they get here, I would like to have a finished track plan. 

Thanks for reading!


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

I like it.


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

Looks like you sure could use a spur to service the paper mill, maybe come off the spur at
the top of the layout, pull onto that spur and than back into the mill.
Or perhaps one more turnout about half way down on the left side.

Magic


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

Magic, looks like the open leg of the crossing to the left of the "small coal mining scene" is where that spur will come from.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

Yup, that is the plan. I just having been working on the track plan much lately. 

Currently I am working on the liftout section so I know what area I have to work with. I am still unsure if I want a passing siding on the lift out or not. I feel like the chance of a train falling off is much greater with a turnout in the air like that.


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

Do the passing siding. I have one on my layout and it'll hold 4-5 cars. I wish it was a scale 1/4 mile. Solid track work and approach & depart the siding at prototypical speeds and you'll be fine.

You could also expand the benchwork to "cover" the turnouts and just have the 3' section in the middle actually lift out. 6'+ is a fairly large section to lift out.


----------



## Aminnich (Nov 17, 2014)

I guess I never really thought about the length of the liftout. 6' is quite long. I ended up putting my weight bench in the middle area. It fits quite nicely. If I do what you suggest and only have the middle 3' be a lift out, I would not be able to get inside the loop with the weight bench there. Of course you did not know the inside of the loop had something there, so thank you for the idea.


----------

