Quality is Job One!

Joe,

Thanks for mentioning me in your editorial. I agree having a quality session is better. With the advent of newer decoder technology it is a lot easier to operate our trains in a much more realistic manner than ever before. 

It may be just me but one of my pet peeves is watching Model Trains either switch cars unrealistically fast or take tight curves unrealistically fast. Someone can have an awesome looking layout with incredibly looking locomotives and cars and then destroy the whole image operating unrealistically. On my Layout couplings are made no more than 4 Scale mph and my tightest 24" radius curves are taken no more than 15 Scale mph. Yard and Industrial tracks are limited to 10 Scale mph. Slowing the layout down to run in a realistic manner has made a 12' x 23' around the walls layout seem twice as large. Below is a link to my YouTube channel showing how Blaze Metals and Recycling is switched. The video takes 10 min long but shows the entire move. Just one industry. Hope you enjoy!

Tim Garland

You're welcome

You're welcome, Tim. Your succinct statement on this subject neatly summarizes pages of explanation into a great soundbite and I wanted to give you credit for it! My editorial takes several pages to explain the ideas and then your punchline statement at the end says the same thing in a lot fewer words.

It's a powerful concept once you get your arms around the idea. It's also why I am so not worried about my smaller (for who knows how long) new TOMA-based SL2 layout. I'm expecting the initially much smaller SL2 will be way more fun to operate than SL1 ever was because of the focus on QUALITY rather than QUANTITY this time around. SL1 was fun, certainly, but the corner cutting to get that behemoth operational ended up creating some issues that I could never fully correct. Those nagging issues always put a damper on the fun for me.

Not this time! The new TOMA approach allows me a much smaller scope so I can focus more on quality and my RUN LIKE A DREAM standards on the track work, rolling stock, and locomotives from right out of the gate.

You can expect me to be writing about this and making videos about it too. I've never been so excited about having less layout to start with. If I never expand it (TOMA obviously let's me keep growing the layout if I want) because I'm having so much fun with the much smaller layout, then so what? Having fun with trains is what it's all about, isn't it?

Focus on Prototype Operations

Joe,

I completely agree with your editorial on smaller layouts. When I was designing my layout I considered many factors and decided a 10'6" X 9'2" room would be adequate for my layout. Could I have made it larger, yes but I wanted to build a layout that focused on "micro" operations of a local working the line so I did not need to build a huge layout to achieve that goal. By keeping it "right sized" for me I was able to hold operations sessions shortly after beginning construction. Even with such a small layout I am able to hold operations sessions that can last 2 to 3 hours. The first switch job I run is the North Local and just setting out and picking up 7or 8 cars at 5 or 6 industries can take an hour or more. This is possible by operating the locomotive just as Joe and Tim Garland advocate, slowly and realistically. I also have operating industry gates, overhead doors and derails that need to be opened before the crew can switch the industry. All of this slows down the pace of operations and replicates the same jobs performed by the prototype crews. Many of my guest operators have been amazed at how much operations I can have with such a small layout. Here is a link to a You Tube video highlighting the operations of the North Local on my Georgia Northeastern model railroad.

I feel that the key to making the most of a small layout is to operate prototypically. By keeping speeds down and taking the time to follow prototypical practices it makes the layout operate like it is a much larger layout. Lance Mindheim often refers to not operating a layout like a UPS delivery truck where the goal is to spend as little time as possible to complete the delivery. You need to slow down and think about how a prototype crew would operate and what they need to do. If you have ever watched the prototype switch an industry it takes a considerable amount of time. I understand that these types of operations are not enjoyed by everyone, but if you have limited space you should consider a small switching layout built using the TOMA approach.      

While my layout was not built as a TOMA, its small size will allow me to actually complete the layout within a reasonable time period. I began construction on my layout just over three years ago and have approximately another year before the layout will be "finished" with structures and scenery. The TOMA has a lot of benefits and might be one of the better ways to complete a layout.

Thomas Klimoski

Modeling the Georgia Northeastern Railroad             

TMMA

Your Multiple Modules at a time Approach for the initial layout is the method I've decided to take for my new layout. After looking over the plan I selected the north wall of the plan which is Eastside area to Guild winery. This area is 4 modules and will give a run a round track plus 3 industries to switch. Adding temporary tracks to the ends will give off scene destinations at each end. I have most of the benchwork already built around the room but working on this more limited area seems like a good way to break up the task into more doable segments and will give a finished area for rolling stock photos and perhaps incentive to carry on :> ).......DaveB

​ 

Yes, YES, and YES!

I love small layouts for exactly the points brought up in this thread, plus more:  realistic operations, easy to maintain, quality over quantity, economical, making the layout run like a dream, etc. 

I was restricted by available space to begin with, so I didn’t have a choice but it didn’t matter. My branch line layout provides plenty of operation, a large variety of industries and thus car types, and small, unique motive power which I find very enjoyable. Plus, two staging extensions provide even more operational interest and movements. A lot to pack into 45 linear feet!

Ok, shameless plug:  slowing down operations is key like Tim and Tom mentioned. What better way to help slow down your operations than with using a true miniature control stand? IMO, much better than whipping a speed knob back and forth.

End of shameless plug.

Yep, thought of that

Operating Realistically

Great plan Scott and I know your Layout will be a blast to operate using your new Throttle. Personally I think someone with a 2 rail O Scale switching layout with a small end cab switcher or GP9 and your Throttle would be extremely fun. I would include an Interchange and a handful of Industries with a runaround on one end and a small Interchange yard with a runaround track on the other.

I have also operated on Tom's layout and had a blast. And Tom has operated on mine. Both mine and his are designed for two to four operators and we both use prototype inspired work order switch lists to handle industry work. See my Switch Lists vs Car Cards and Waybills blog.

Joe I see you are enjoying running your locomotives in a more prototypical fashion. Since I have begun converting my roster over to the new LokSound Full Throttle feature let me tell you what I do to simulate how I run the real locomotives.

First when I start a train from a stop I will move the Throttle to notch one if slack is bunched and then release the independent brake. If slack is stretched I may start in notch two or three if train is on ascending grade or perhaps even four or five if the train is pretty heavy. This is necessary to keep from rolling backwards.

To simulate this same effect with Full Throttle I just move to speed step one and then hit drive hold. This stretches the slack. With drive hold still active I can increase speed steps to simulate higher notches.

On the prototype once the slack is stretched I start increasing notches. Again a lot depends on grade and tonnage because I am aware of how much force I'm putting on the drawbars of the cars at the headend of the train. It is a tug of war! 

Once the train gets rolling then inertia kicks in and in the case where you need to keep the speed below a certain mph like in the yard I'll start notching back off. If I need to stop to either clear a switch or for the Conductor to make a cut I'll be out of power if the weight of the train will push me or may just need to notch back if I'm on an ascending grade letting it stall itself out. Most Model Railroads are pretty flat so what you said about coasting is pretty accurate. Again Full Throttle makes this easy. I have found running my trains this way to be really enjoyable. To me it adds another layer of realism. My thoughts are once immersed in this new method of operating models more like the prototype you realize an hour or two has passed by and you don't need half the number of Industries you thought you did when you first planned your Layout. Hence, the more prototypically one operates the less Layout one needs.

Tim

Add Sergent couplers to the mix

For small layouts, using Sergent couplers also help make operations more realistic. 

The couplers are not for everyone. But on my layout where I’m moving, on average, 4-8 cars, the couplers will play a significant role. Having to position each coupler and open the knuckle is fun. (I can hear the majority of modelers yelling, "are you kidding me!")  

A different opinion....

A different opinion....

I'm a long-term subscriber, and typically just read the forum as time permits.  MRH offers a great opportunity to learn, and the forum contributors and discussions have been top-notch in terms of modeling skills, ideas, and helpfulness.

However, I've noticed a negative tone/trend towards large layouts in favor of TOMA or small layouts.   As a large layout owner and operator, I've taken exception to this trend, and this month's Publisher's Musings column and reader comments have been no exception.  

Why is there an opinion that a large layout cannot focus on QUALITY rather than QUANTITY?  Sure, it may take more resources to ensure quality is primary, but layout size should not be relevant if the owner has the resources. That focus is often accomplished and is irrelevant of the layout size. Please don't generalize just because the layout is "large." A large layout can also Run Like a Dream.  Most do, and some don't, but this is also the case with smaller layouts, or any size layout for that matter.  

A large layout can be operated just as prototypically as a small layout. Each job can be slowed down to use time realistically. It may require more people to operate, or a session configured to accommodate fewer operators, but it certainly can be done and is often accomplished. The fidelity towards prototype operation should not be based on solely on the size of the layout.  If configuring all of the rolling stock and power on a large layout with Sergent couplers, why would that be more or less realistic on a small or large layout?  

If the bottom line is "what can one person handle with his or her limited resources," then use that framework rather than just "layout size" to illustrate the point.  I've read in other forums, social media, etc. of MRH's bias against large layouts, which I believe is creating a perception that MRH is too opinionated and elitist, not positioning itself to accommodate most levels of layout owners. I hope this is not the case, as I believe that MRH and its contributors have been well balanced in publishing articles and information about other topics.

Yes, there are a number of large layout owners that feel their layouts are more satisfying than a small layout. Some may have bitten-off more than they can chew, and some not.  I'm sure the inverse opinion is also true with smaller layouts, which is why some small layout owners become dissatisfied and then build larger layouts.  

The real secret is how to be satisfied and happy with the layout size that you have, and what to do if you're not satisfied.  Is there a reveal to this secret in future editions of MRH?  

Micro vs Macro

Wasn't it in a different thread on MRH FORUMS we discussed Micro vs Macro?  What Joe writes is very true IF your interest is in Micro Operations.  HOWEVER, if your interest is in Macro Operations, then having a long length of run usually is the only option to have a layout that fullfills that desire.  For myself, I am willing to give up the superdetailing of scenes and equipment in exchange to having the ability to run more prototypical length trains for a Class 1 RR in the early 1950s and having TT&TO operations.  Yes you can simulate this with one or two towns if one wishes to, but that really limits the experience and in my opinion the enjoyment of operations. 

Ken L.

Room for everyone’s likes and interests

Hello John, 

I don’t believe the tone of this thread is disparaging large layouts. It’s simply a few modeler’s opinions on realistic operation and how a smaller layout can still have that type of operation. 

I like large layouts and operate on several on a regular basis. They have smooth operations with top-quality scenery, too. So, please don’t get the impression that just because someone prefers a smaller layout that they don’t appreciate large layouts or that those layouts can’t measure up to a smaller one. 

Looking at your web site I see your large layout is absolutely spectacular. Well done! It’s exciting to see your excellent modeling and I’m sure it runs like a dream. 

When Carl Arendt was still alive and hosting the Micro Layout Scrapbook I loved viewing those extremely small layouts each month. There were plenty of modelers on that site who were very enthusiastic about micro layouts and the benefits of building tiny layouts. Compared to those modelers my layout is huge. I didn’t take offense. I simply enjoyed the modeling and their opinions for what it was worth – ie: their approach to an enjoyable hobby. 

No, I don’t believe MRH is elitist. I don’t think one should throw around words like elitist because it just incites negativity. I think there’s room for many different approaches and as long as people respect the choices other modelers make it’s all good.

Please, let’s not get into a debate or argument about size.

Okay, then let's see the article

It's achievable - okay, I'll buy that. Now tell us what you're signing up for with a large layout and HOW to make QUALITY OF RUN work on a large layout and spell it out in such a way that anyone can do it.

Can we get such an article? We need MORE such articles that deal with how to do the hobby overall and do it well. Just talking about the models all the time ignores this "elephant in the room" topic, so let's not ignore it any longer.

I would argue many modelers embark on a massive layout project without realizing what they're signing up for and a lot of these larger layout projects never become operational, but are abandoned. Let's make modelers more aware up front about what's involved to get a successful large layout that runs well.

Can we get someone (anyone) with a large layout that has a great quality of run to write up an article on how this is done? The article needs to explain it in such a way that anyone can do it.

P.S. Remember, TOMA isn't exactly anti-large-layout. It simply forces you to more deliberately scope manage a larger layout by taking it in smaller bite-sized pieces. TOMA lets you have ops all along the way instead of waiting for a room-filling behemoth to finally reach an operational level. My basement-filling SL2 TOMA is anything but small in overall total scope.

Thanks Scott...

Thanks Scott, appreciate your response...

I also don't believe that MRH is elitist, however, that is a contrary view to some opinions out there.  In fact, I believe that was a subject of a thread presented here on MRH forums by Joe a while back.

I would also like to prevent a debate on layout size, however, the topic is often presented in MRH and in the forums, so I believe a healthy discussion is warranted if it is presented.  

Thanks again, and appreciate all of your work on the new control stand - can't wait to see that in operation.  Bravo!     

I don't see the TOMA concept as

negative toward big layouts, it's simply pointing out the amount of time and resources required for a large layout are greater than many folks estimate. Most large layouts get started but never finished. Small layouts are also often never finished but they at least waste less time and effort before abandonment. The hobby press traditionally emphasizes larger layouts since that's what brings in more bucks for the advertisers( most model railroad products end up never used but the buyers were dreaming about that large layout ). If MRH can help modelers take an easier path to their own satisfaction then that's a positive for both large and small layout builders. Exploring the methods of keeping a balance between hobby time and  real world living can only help prospective as well as experienced modelers......DaveB

Thanks, John!

John,

I just took a wonderful tour of your layout via YouTube and even caught a glimpse of you loading batteries in controllers before an operating session. 

I have to say your layout is amazing! 

The video guy sounded like he had an eastern accent. Are you out east?

Thanks for building such an inspiring layout!

Thanks Joe....

Hi Joe, thanks for your response....

What I am looking for is very similar to many layout owners, regardless of size - to build an operate a model railroad to share with others and have fun!  

I'll contact you off-line about an article. To be honest, I'm not sure what that all entails, but I will contribute any way I can to help.

I will agree with your point regarding getting in over your head with a large layout.  However, let's be honest here and say that concept applies to layout construction in general.  I've seen a lot of smaller layouts that turn into "lame ducks" because the owner has lost interest, which could be for a variety of reasons.   

Not "anyone" can build a large layout, just as not "anyone" can build a small layout. I think we can all agree building any size layout requires skills, resources, time, and other contributing factors.  The differentiation is that more or less may  (or may not) be required based on the size.

I'm in Colorado

Hi Scott,

The video was taken by Art Houston during an invitational operating session.  I'm located in Colorado, just north of the Denver area.  If you're ever in the area, drop me a note. Appreciate the nice comments...

TOMA is not my way

I'm moving in about 3 months and will be building a 14'x40' layout.  Frankly my main interest is in getting the layout operational, scenery comes later.  My approach is to build a small section and test it by running trains.  Once the track and wiring are working well, then on to the next section, with each section being 4 or 5 feet long.  I agree with the need for quality, so I will not cut corners.

2 layouts that influence my approach are the G&D of John Allen and the Canandaigua Southern of John Armstrong.  The mainline was never completed on the G&D, the scenery was never completed for the CS. 

Life is choices, so if the scenery never gets finished - I'm okay with that.  But I do hope to have all the track laid and wired.

Since I'm building a short line, I'll start at one terminal and work towards the other.  If it happens that along the way I decide I have enough layout before the end, well then I'll just stop building.

Paul

Hmmm, when you put it that

Joe wrote:

Okay, then let's see the article

Hmmm, when you put it that way, sounds like it would be a darn fine idea for an article. 

General outline based on my conditions:

• My goal was always to do proto-ops.  About 15 years ago, I decided that operation was going to be utilizing timetable and train order operation.  I've had 15 people running down in my basement doing TT&TO sessions, and the layout is far from finished.
• When you start building a layout, do the research, and choose proven techniques.  I was able to integrate my original part of my layout into my new plan.  Used techniques outlined in the "Model Railroader" Wachita and Santa Fe series of articles.  My original layout will be 30 years young in July, still going strong, and still has scenery to finish.  I didn't have to tear it down and start over because "I cut corners".  
• Exchange "horsepower hours" with friends.  I have two other friends with layouts that need work input too.  We share tasks, and we all have our strong points.  I have an additional friend that doesn't have a layout, but loves to lay track.  He gets compensated with a wide variety of beer in the layout room beer fridge, while we work listening to mostly classic jazz and jazz fusion music, with some blues thrown in for variety.
• Build your layout in stages so that you can get up and operating quickly.  Every town, yard track, siding, and scenic detail doesn't have to be even close to done if you plan out what you need to get to having minimal operations, and then keep working up from there.
• I've repeated my use of time tested techniques utilizing steel stud benchwork (another "Model Railroader" article, part of my last layout utilized this technique, worked out well), and Owens Corning FORMULAR 2" insulation sheathing (Bill Darnaby's articles in "Model Railroader").  I know you have serious reservations about this technique, but it has worked out well for me, and I'm getting my layout built 50% faster than conventional wood techniques.
• I have a multi-deck layout.  I purchased a helix kit from Easy Helix LLC.  It is 12 turns, double track from top to bottom.  Saved a bunch of time with this. 

Regards,

Jerry Zeman

I know an author Joe....

... who has such a layout.  Unfortunately, he's on staff with one of your comeptitors! :-\

Ken L.

Giving TOMA a chance

I had all of these big dreams for a layout, and was worried about having to wait for my move next year, but, I've decided to give TOMA a shot... I mean... worse case, I do a big layout, and attach the TOMA to it, right?

I have given myself a long term goal for a layout, and that is... I want to eventually, some day, build a layout that is worthy of hosting an Ops Session!

Yes, yes... I know what you're going to say about the worth of a layout, but, when I say "worthy", what I mean, is something I'm proud of. I look at layout building as art... and many people create art, but, hosting an Ops Session, to me at least, is the same as an artist having a gallery opening. They aren't going to do it until they think their art is ready to their own picky standards (and as artists, we really are our own worst critics)

 "a layout that is worthy of

Be aware that a layout capable of holding operating sessions doesn't have to be large. The complete prototype Harlem Transfer terminal would fit onto a 4 by 8 sheet of plywood in HO scale. Everything came in and went out on carfloats so very little "running" tracks are needed, just the switching and customer tracks.....DaveB

Seems you can't win sometimes ...

No complaints here…

…I just want it ALL, Joe!  

Micro to major warehouse – it’s all good if it’s a model and it runs on rails.