# Thoughts on layout design



## deanp (Mar 29, 2016)

So after looking at the first idea and the problems that were brought up and some reflecting I came up with an other idea to run past you all. Still L shaped HO layout but I think everything can be reached for the most part. Curves are 18 and 22's The red track will be the main line and the yellow are passing areas. The blue will have a passenger station and the green will service a couple industries. I still want to have both passenger and freight trains. 

I am thinking the roadway will be built as an overpass where it runs north/south. Still deciding how that will be done. The east/west road has a square to be kind of a city block at the west end and plan to use the merchant's row buildings or the like. 










I used the scarm program and i know there are a couple places where the track doesn't quite meet but that will be worked out as I know there is always a little fiddle room with the track.

Originally the yellow track only had a switch at the top and bottom but then decided it may be better to add another pair to make two passing sidings or have the option of one long siding.

Just looking for some thoughts/opinions/ideas.
Thanks!


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I have a single track DCC main with 3 passing sidings.
One of them will permit only 3-70' passenger cars behind
my F7 2 loco consist.

Will your passenger or whatever train you expect to 
use the passing sidings be short enough to fit?

Don


----------



## Overkast (Jan 16, 2015)

You might want to consider connecting the North green siding and the SouthEast green siding so you can get freight from one to the other without needing to use the Yellow line. That way the yellow line could be leveraged as a better passenger station siding (considering Don's feedback).


----------



## dave1905 (Jul 7, 2013)

Please do not run the roads down the middle of the benchwork and make them all straight. It make it look toy like and is hard to scenic.

Even better is to not connect all the parts of the layout with one road. Railroads carry stuff hundreds of miles. Why would you want to use a train if everything is only a couple blocks away. making the roads discontinuous makes things look bigger.


----------



## deanp (Mar 29, 2016)

I have a single F7 engine for the passenger train and 4 cars which may be downsized if needed. I have a pullman, observation, dining and baggage cars. With all 5 pieces, its too long for the shorter passing siding and would have to use the full yellow line. Dropping a car out of it might allow it to fit. 

Didn't even occur to me to connect the green lines but that is certainly doable and makes sense. Still pretty new to all of this and is why I appreciate the input. 

Had thought about adding a wye or turnout on the north green line and at the curve on the southern end of the east green line just to have 2 tracks to be able to park cars. Maybe empties could be stored behind the industry awaiting pickup? 

The plan for the southern area is some kind of a warehouse type building. What I envision is war time setting where factories were turned into manufacturing facilities for the military building tanks and Jeeps and such. Use some of the open area to store finished vehicles ready for delivery.

This site has been a wealth of information. Open to any ideas y'all might have


----------



## deanp (Mar 29, 2016)

Dave, thanks for the thoughts on the road. See, another thing that I guess I hadn't thought about. Looking at other layouts I wondered why roads seem to just run off the layout. Something else to go back to the drawing board for


----------



## Overkast (Jan 16, 2015)

Dean, don't get discouraged about "going back to the drawing board" either... it took me 18 major revisions of my track plan before I finally settled! It's a process for sure... but a rewarding one.

I'm not sure what kind of flexibility you have in HO (I'm working in N Scale myself), but if you can somehow get a 2-track mainline instead of 1 I think you'd be a lot happier running trains on that layout. You could have 1 train in constant motion on the outer mainline and the inner mainline could be used for running another train and/or sharing switching operations with your sidings.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## HO LOVER (Nov 25, 2007)

Overkast said:


> Dean, don't get discouraged about "going back to the drawing board" either... it took me 18 major revisions of my track plan before I finally settled! It's a process for sure... but a rewarding one.
> 
> I'm not sure what kind of flexibility you have in HO (I'm working in N Scale myself), but if you can somehow get a 2-track mainline instead of 1 I think you'd be a lot happier running trains on that layout. You could have 1 train in constant motion on the outer mainline and the inner mainline could be used for running another train and/or sharing switching operations with your sidings.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I agree here, 1 main line will get tiring pretty quick.


----------



## deanp (Mar 29, 2016)

Re-worked it a bit and made the yellow a second main. Will have to nudge here and there but I do like this better. Originally figured with a single main, I wouldn't get bored since I'd always be stopping/starting using the passing sidings to let trains by. Then the more I thought about that vs 2 main lines, I think that would get old fast and everything would have to stop to be able to look at the switching operation as limited as it may be. This will still allow for either train to run on either track and still allow for the use of the green line without stopping one of the mains. 

Took the above advice on the roads and broke them up. Does make it seem bigger. Roads are still straight since I'm not that talented with the program. I think the west one will be fairly straight like a city block and the others will probably wonder a bit. Thinking the southern road may be dirt/gravel rather than pavement. Added in some basic shapes for buildings/industries and a small lake. Still not really sure what to /what not to add in the open areas or how the landscape should go. Really not modeling anything specific other than what pops into my head.

The latest revision to the plan








.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Overkast said:


> Dean, don't get discouraged about "going back to the drawing board" either... it took me 18 major revisions of my track plan before I finally settled! It's a process for sure... but a rewarding one.
> 
> I'm not sure what kind of flexibility you have in HO (I'm working in N Scale myself), but if you can somehow get a 2-track mainline instead of 1 I think you'd be a lot happier running trains on that layout. You could have 1 train in constant motion on the outer mainline and the inner mainline could be used for running another train and/or sharing switching operations with your sidings.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I have to heartily reinforce Overkast's opinion. It's a huge mistake to think it's a "once and done" thing. Keep at the design until you're pretty happy with it, then tinker during the building process as your plan has a nasty collision with reality. That's the way you get good layouts.

I somewhat disagree on the "two main tracks" point. For my money, you really don't have much to do on that layout other than watch trains go around. My suggestion would be to add a few more sidings off of that yellow track to ensure you won't get bored with it.

Finally, I know you think there is some ability to fudge track connections. I strongly recommend you reconsider. Fudged track connections equates to kinks, stalls, and derailments -- and that's not the fun part of model railroading. Rather than using all sectional track, use flex track, or at least a piece or two to enable all your connections to be solid and kink-free.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

Deanp - That is where the fun comes in - redesign/revise the layout and actual lay them, according to the planned layout. There is always something that come up that make the layout looking better then previous designs. 

I noticed that you use all straight turnouts. Have you consider to use curved turnouts? You are not restricted to use only one branded track parts. You can use other branded track parts. By using the curved turnouts, it does make huge difference and more realistic. Here is an example: top one uses all straight turnouts and bottom one use two different curved turnouts.










I did the same thing. I made my layout on SCARM with many different revises. I like it so much until the point that I was done with the layout design. THEN I scraped it! Just because it does not feel "realistic" to me, so I had to start over again. With clean slate and what I have on hands: Peco curved turnouts, Atlas straight turnouts and transfer table. Of course, curved/straight/flex tracks will be used, I am still working on the new layout that looks better than the original layout. I use photos/google map/layout plans to inspire me for what I would like to see on the table.


----------



## deanp (Mar 29, 2016)

No problem going back to the drawing board. I figured from the start it could go through quite a bit of changes. I am wondering if I should get the industry buildings to lay out and see what it looks like it will need to service them. Does anyone build the layout around the structures or do you design the layout and find structures that fit around the layout?

Will check into the curved turnouts next time I get to the hobby shop. Don't remember seeing any at the local shop. Caboose hobbies is an hour and a half away so may need to go browsing through their store for ideas. 

I do have a few pieces of flex track to help where things don't exactly line up with purely sectional track. 

Seems like every time I look at it something else pops into the head and makes me think should this go here, should i add that, etc. Guess that is half the fun of designing a layout.


----------



## Overkast (Jan 16, 2015)

deanp said:


> I am wondering if I should get the industry buildings to lay out and see what it looks like it will need to service them. Does anyone build the layout around the structures or do you design the layout and find structures that fit around the layout?


Don't buy any industry buildings unless you are ABSOLUTELY sure they will fit and your track plan is finalzed. Your track plan will dictate how much area you have to work with for terrain, and you'll need to plan your terrain around the industry structures, but often you'll have to complete the surrounding terrain before you place those structures.

What I try to do is find the dimensions of the structures I think I want on my layout, and I'll actually make a paper cutout to scale of those dimensions so I know how much space the structure will eventually take up. Then I adjust my terrain plans accordingly as I go. Only after I'm sure my track and roads can fit into the terrain plan, will I commit to buying a structure.



Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## deanp (Mar 29, 2016)

Thanks Overkast, been looking at a few different structures. Will cut up some paper the size of the footprint and use those to see how everything looks in relation to the track layout.


----------

