What scale?

I would go for whatever you

24"

I wouldn't go over 24" unless you have to. it's very hard to reach the back after that.

18" is plenty of space for a shelf run and you can widen out to 20 or 24 where needed.

I like option 2.

Option 1

I like option #1,

We run 30" deep modules on our On30 group modular layout and the depth works fine.

John

Elevation?

Shelf depth is directly related to shelf height. As the shelves get higher off the floor the depth should become less and less else you won't be able to reach to the back of them. Zero elevation on my layout is 53". At that height 24" depth is the max I can reach.

Working reach

Just remember, theres a major difference in how far you can reach and how far you can reach and be able to work comfortably. Something I always like to point out when it comes to questions of layout depth.

Michael

30" on modular

30" on modular is ok because you can easily reach the back side - either it's in a aisle somewhere OR it's a module, and you can move it

Narrow Shelf Industries

I have several industries and scenes on narrow benchwork.  You can model quite a bit of operation and include convincing scenery along with major customers.

This area is 12" wide.

This one is 12" too.

Benchwork here is somewhat wider, but still only 17".

Just to the right of the photo above the same town looks like this.  Again 17" deep.

This scene is about 12" deep, and I think the switching area below it is around 10".

24" shelves

I have 24 inches shelves on my O scale layout and I have plenty of room. You should not have any issues whatsoever. My radius is 26" minimum is 24" and I run 40 ft rolling stock.

Thanks for input guys! So

Thanks for input guys!

So it looks like I'm going to go with plan #2 with 18" shelves on the side and 24" shelves at the back wall. Now I only have to come up with a layout plan for the track.

My intention is to have something that 4-5 guys can operate and do some switching. Thinking that there's going to be a bridge to gap the 36" opening to get into the layout. This will allow me some continuous running when I feel like it. But mostly I'm interested in industrial switching. I would like a coal unloading area, something like a freighter at a dock or mining facility. A coal fired power plant. A paper mill. Some inter modal shipping action and some smaller industry to switch. Oh and I have to have an oil distributor. I don't think I'm being too unreasonable.

Any thoughts on that?

I'll post some pics of the area in the basement that I'm going to be using. 

Thanks again for the comments. It's encouraging to get some feedback.

Fused

That is some really nice work

That is some really nice work there! It's amazing what a person can pull off with those widths. I feel a lot better using 18" on the sides of the room like in plan #2. Still thinking of 30" on the back wall but I think I'll settle on the 24".

Thanks Rob!

I've definitively dropped plan #3 now... 

Checkout Lance Mindheim's work

Check Lance's work for some inspiring shelf trackplan ideas

http://www.lancemindheim.com/photo_gallery.htm

and also the MRH trackplan database.

Cheers,

Narrow shelves

In addition to the excellent work Rob shared, I'd suggest taking a look at what James McNab's done on extremely narrow shelves -  http://www.iaisrailfans.org/gallery/MJMGrimesLine .  Lance Mindheim has also done beautiful work on 18-24" shelves on his Downtown Spur layout -  http://www.lancemindheim.com/downtown_spur2.htm .

For what it's worth, on my layout, I've never wished I'd gone wider than my 24"+ shelves, but on several occasions have narrowed those areas where possible.  I'm 6'4" with a fairly decent reach, but maintenance and scenery work is SO much easier on more narrow shelves.

That's a real nice layout

That's a real nice layout there Joe. Thanks for the input. I'm leaning towards staying with a max 24" width now. I'm always amazed at what people have done in this hobby. 

Really nice work.

Fused

"Any thoughts on that?"

Start searching for cities that have all that or as close to all that as you can find. New York city had a waterfront and had all those and more commodities arrive but there were no producers of things like lumber, autos,cement ,coal and oil, there were distributors. Instead of modeling the paper mill you might have to model the printing plant for instance....DaveB 

Good suggestions

I like the idea of doing a NY waterfront. So many possibilities. 

I've gone through all the layout plans in the layout database and save a few pics for reference. I don't have anything so far that I have picked.

Fused

Links

Sorry, I'm not sure which one you were referring to, but just to be clear, the two links in the body of my last message were for James McNab's and Lance Mindheim's layouts.  I only wish I could take credit for their work. 

Oops

My apologies Joe. I also would love to have that skill level.

Fused

Lance Mindheim

Check out Lance Mindheim's books. He has great advice on building shelf layouts with minimum radii and shelf width suggestions.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=lance+mindheim

An example of what can be

An example of what can be done on a 9 inch deep shelf from an old layout of mine. It has a mainline, runaround track, and a long spur with a structure. So imagine what you can achieve with a wider shelf.

Cheers.

Getting a lot of good advice...

Thanks guys, looks like I'm going out tonight to get the rest of the plywood for my shelves. I'm going with 18" on the sides and 24" at the back. Should give me plenty of space. I'm looking forward to being able to lay some track to play around a bit.

Fused

12 inch shelves

I'm a scenery guy....

So I like wide shelves, my minimum is 18 inches and I like 24 inches better. That being said, a lot of times I'm using that extra width in the back for the mountain terrain I prefer. My track work is towards the front and easily within reach.  Just something to consider when planning shelf width. There's a lot of guys out there who do narrow shelves with low relief structures and photo backdrops and they do it convincingly and well.  Personally I'd rather have as much 3D scenery as space will allow.  A lot depends on what you model as far as what works and what doesn't.

Michael

Engineering Anyone?

I believe this is a valid and very important statement.

Broad brushing the width question likely results in answers too simplistic for each and every situation. Beyond the physical limitations and restrictions, depth needs to be determined by more consideration than just what everyone else is doing.

A good example in play at the moment is Rob's blob mountain conundrum. If Rob had an additional 12" depth to work with he could more easily solve his illusion issue. Rob clearly planned well but still found himself in a challenging position. Building flats and photo backdrops are not the universal answer. Imagine how many more of those challenging positions Rob would have incurred had he not planned well or simply said I'll make my shelves narrow because everyone else does.

I am convinced there is more to the depth story than pat answers.