One vote for simple

First of all, thank you very much for your service, and for the sacrifices that both you and your wife have made for our country. Very much appreciated!

Personally, as I've built my first layout, I've been surprised at how little layout I'd need in order to enjoy operations. I wouldn't call my layout "track dense" by any means, but it's still more than I would have needed for the kind of operation I've come to enjoy.

Something else to keep in mind is that you'll want bullet-proof track and reliable operation no matter how complex your plan is.  Even moreso as complexity builds, as every one of those turnouts is a potential derailment point. Also, more track means more track cleaning. 

With moves likely in your future, I would definitely lean toward a simpler plan. Faster time-to-operations, and very likely easier to reuse in your next home.

I would definitely think TOMA

Maybe start out with one leg of a plan.  Maybe you lay the ground work for a more complex plan, but only lay the track for a simpler part of the eventual configuration.  It then can evolve as time and money allows.  Simple also means less damage in the inevitable moves to come.

Erick, Oklahoma "micro"

Your post reminded me of a rather small layout featured in the late Carl Arendt's micro layouts scrapbook.  It depicted Erick, OK in 1988.  Wouldn't have to build it exactly as shown ... could lengthen it a bit and even continue it eastward in the future.

http://www.carendt.com/micro-layout-design-gallery/standard-gauge-lines/

I go along with Joe's

I go along with Joe's idea...simple is often better especially for ease of construction, maintenance, portability and operation. I have worked on many short lines with very little track and it's amazing how much time it takes to switch a few cars realistically with just a few switches.

On my simple layout I use good, old dependable, Atlas Code 83 track and switches along with either cork or Cascade homasote roadbed. Once painted with a little rattle can brown spray paint the size of the rail looks smaller.

I would start with a simple 18-24"X 6-8' door panel or 2" foam for a base, and build a simple layout including a run around track, a few industrial tracks with a couple facing opposite directions, and add a 6"X4-6' long "staging yard" with a couple of tracks off to one end handle a "yard" for interchange and building short trains. This type of layout would use only a dozen switches and maybe six lengths of flex track, along with a 4-wheel locomotive and a dozen cars. When it comes to car types and industries again I would stay on the simple side with variety like a tank car for liquids ( maybe an LPG distributor, fertilizer or corn syrup/oil reciever,oil) a couple of covered hoppers (for plastic resins, grain,sand or flour) a couple of boxcars (for paper roll stock, scrap paper, or finished lumber, shingles, etc.) one or two flats (for inbound lumber)  and then maybe a uniqe car or two like a gon (for scrap metal) a mechanical reefer (for a team track or food processor) and finally an open top hopper (for aggregates). Industries should have variety but simplicity with mostly back ground warehouse,structures, a tank or two and maybe one full size (but small one) structure. The industries I have listed are many of the usual ones found on modern short lines today.

I can't emphasize, enough, the importance of the runaround track to give the feeling of a crew/train arriving at the industrial location/town, locomotive first, using it to position cars for spotting at various spurs and then departing, locomotive first, back to staging. Many modelers fail to understand the importance of this handy piece of track work instead using an engine to just shove cars into a bunch of spurs. While it can be found most crews want the run around and when you include it along with both facing and trailing point spurs it increases the " play value" of a small layout tremendously. and it makes prototype railroading a lot simpler.

Take it from a retired railroader who spent many hours riding shoves in all kinds of rotten weather, looking out for traffic at road crossings and enduring the pain of having to hold on to the grab irons of a freight car, no matter the distance... I'll take a run around track anytime.

To better help you in this area, check out some of Lance Mindheim's great books on designing and building small realistic railroads including my favorite:  How to Build a Small Switching Layout. BTW, He and I have had many conversations regarding the importance of using run around tracks and he agrees if possible include them.

Barry

Build what you like. The

Build what you like. The south plains district seems to have a yard that can be fed from staging at either end plus the industries on the layout. If one extends the staging tracks on either end trains can be assembled and run from the yard to staging, one might choose to have a slightly different connection system at each end to enhance the going someplace feel.

As to track it takes work and attention to detail to do a good job on track if it is a little or a lot. The latter just adds more of it. Both the simplistic and complicated have their own strong points. Easiest way to decide is to look at the plans and mentally operate them. Switch the industries visualize the trains going from place to place, sort the cars in the yard etc. After that which one appeals to you the most? Build that one.

Go Modular and Simple

I am a novice as well and spent plenty of time planning before my first move. I have begun by doing a 2x7 module first. I decided on Peco 83 track for the detail and their quality turnouts and have not been disappointed with their track. It is also light years better than the Atlas components I have used in the past. All of the modules are built from 3/4" plywood to free-mo standards.

These choices allow me to build a sturdy set of modules that are not overwhelming in size or scope. They can be moved within 15 minutes and can be reconfigured for any future locations in our house, in a different house, at shows, or outdoors. By only having 4 turnouts and 3 industries, I can limit expenses and have enough operation for up to 30 minutes a night. 

Start small, because you will make more mistakes. I am setting up the track first and will run it without scenery for a good year to iron out any problems. I want bulletproof operations as well and this only comes from perfecting your skills. Start simple since you can always add more later..

Easy Farmrail layout

Model Railroader had an article on Farmrail in their May 1992 issue page 64 to 71. It will give you lots of realistic operation without drowning in track. What's nice about this design is you can build a part of the layout to start with and add later when you have more space and a more permanent place to build. My own layout is 8x7 foot with minimal tracks in an industrial park. Also on the principal of first build smaller to get going and then add on once the layout gets a permanent place.

second layout

I would strongly suggest you ask yourself what "really" interests you about the hobby.  Does your enjoyment come from the trains themselves?  Or may be you have a strong interest in scenery and structures?  I believe if you answer these questions seriously, the answer to your question will become obvious and your enjoyment in the hobby will be much better and last longer.  Follow your true interests and likes, and the answers will come.

I know of two home layouts that absolutely minimize their track work and operational abilities, but the scenery and the structures are absolutely unbelievable, A+ on both.  The trains were basically an excuse for building scenery and detailing structures.

And on the other hand, there are a couple of layouts in the area that are absolutely void of scenery and could be considered a "rat's nest" of track work and make believe industries.  But it works operationally and guys come from miles around to operate on them.

In both cases, those owners are happy and content with their individual interests and their continued involvement in the hobby.  So I say again, be truthful with yourself, find out what 'really' makes you happy with the hobby and base your layout decision on that fact.

I'd keep things simple and

I'd keep things simple and keep it Farmrail / Grainbelt. 

I'd stick to a modular concept so that when it has to move, it can move with a minimum of fuss and "temporary destruction."  There' a bit more planning required to make the module joints meet in a manner than eliminates removal of track and scenery.  But it can be done.  Work can be done on one module at a time so that you can get practice at all the basics of the layout process at just about any time.  That's a good way to ward off "boredom" or the lack of incentive.

Farmrail and Grainbelt have a wide variety of industries across their system, and I'd make an inventory of them to pick the ones that have the greatest variety of cars that arrive and depart their spurs.  It does not have to be just grain elevators, oil and frac sand terminals and such.  Maybe not all of the industries you'll choose to model will be located in ONE town, but I think you can choose the right types and sizes to blend into a very believable scene.  Best deal would be have a local engine assigned to switch out the town.  That way, "road freights" would arrive with cuts of cars for local industries, and also pickup the outbound cars that your local switch engine has blocked.  An operations sequence such as this can really make the smaller layout come alive, and keep one or two operators busy!

I'd think in terms of what you "could" fit into a typical 9x11 or 10x12 foot "spare bedroom" footprint.  You may or may not end up with a space that is that size and totally useable, but using those dimensions, you can better plot what kind of corner modules you might want to create, and then of course, the long and short wall segments can be modified to fit between them.  There's so much more you can throw in a corner module than just a pair of 90 degree turns... you just have to look at them in very fresh and inventive ways.

Plans?  Keep working at them, and revising them.  Maybe some will only get along to perhaps 25 or 50 percent completion on paper or computer, but KEEP them all and that way you can take what feature(s) you liked from that attempt and then try to meld them into another attempted plan. Don't be afraid to throw some unusual designs with weird angles and track arrangements... sometimes they will lead you into a totally new direction of design that really makes it POP. 

And even if they are just 1x4's about eight feet long wth flextrack, make sure you add "runnoffs" on one or both ends of the "current layout module arragement."  You don't need a two or three track staging yard, just a way to have the trains arrive and depart from the actual layout scene. It can fold down and have just a simple A-frame for support when raised.

I think there have been ample articles in MRH and the other mags abut the possibilities of smaller layouts.  You may not be running several trains with CTC, with 3 and 4 unit diesel lashups and DPU's, but even the shelf layout along a long wall or two adjoining walls of a room can keep you occupied for years.  Time for the really small detailing projects that makes your railroad stand out from the others.  I truly believe a great percentage of "first" and "second" layouts get the builder bogged down in endless construction, revision or maintenance work that it NEVER gets to be more than a "wood girder frame with track here and there.  

By making the layout manageable for just YOU to work on, you'll have a greater chance to have a layout that is much more close to being "nearly complete' and presentable as a project that will keep you coming back for more and more, and hopefully introduce others to the hobby - rather than having just a massive benchwork, a few rough landforms, and so-so track to show.  

I hope things work out for you, in your career and your hobby.  The hobby can do so much for a person when you're in turmoil with relocations, new jobs and assignments and such.  And, ours is a GREAT hobby.

Pat Flynn
Leland, NC
"Modeling a SMALL portion of the Western Pacific and Sacramento Northern in the BIG valley..."
 

staging cassette

A cassette can add a yard worth of cars without the switch ladders.  Get bored of one set of rolling stock, push it off the visible set and pull out another train. A 3 or 4 ft 3-track cassette on drawer slides can hold many cars.

Look at the Sept 2011 MRH

If you have not seen it, yet.  Check out the article "Poor Man's Jig Built Turnouts" in the Sept. 2011 issue of MRH.  They will be much better operating than Atlas.

I've tried to adapt that plan

I've tried to adapt that plan to my room, it has proved difficult.  One issue is that I live in an apartment, so nothing can be attached to the walls.  Also, I must have access to a closet, and the closet doors take up most of one wall.  I have one more idea on how to make the "South End of the Grainbelt" plan from 1992 to fit that I might sketch up and share on here. 

Here is What I Have So Far:

Thanks for all the input and advice everyone!  I sketched up this plan:

Its designed to fit on five "dominoes" and has a staging cassette built on shelf brackets.  It uses Micro Engineering Code 70 track and #6 turnouts.  Benchwork will be built with 1x4s, with 2x2 legs, 1/4 inch plywood and 1 in of foam for the subroadbed, and a masonite backdrop attached to the dominoes.  There's only nine turnouts, but I think there is a lot of potential for operation:

The premise is the former MKT line into Oklahoma City survived as a short line into the NE suburbs of the city to serve an industrial area.  From the demise of the MKT line to floods (in the real world timeline) in the 70's until the early 2000's, it was a ramshackle little shortline called the Oklahoma City Belt.  Now the line, known as the "Deep Fork Spur" (for the nearby creek called the Deep Fork River), is switched by the Arkansas-Oklahoma RR.  The A-OK reaches the spur via trackage rights through the Union Pacific yard in downtown Oklahoma City.

All the industries are based on ones in OKC.  The biggest one, the Purina Mill, is based on one in downtown OKC switched by the UP.  It takes grain hoppers (which I have plenty of) and tank cars.  Norwesco plastics will take pellet hoppers in and ship items out via boxcar.  The lumberyard will get flats, chemical facility will get tank cars, and the warehouse more boxcars.  The team track will get mostly frack sand.  

I like that this plan is suburban industrial, minimal on track but maximizes operation, and uses some structures, locos, and rolling stock I already have.  My only doubts are not having a continuous run (which i've done without thus far on my first layout attempt) and leaving behind my current Farmrail in rural OK theme.  I think I'll store away the Farmrail equipment for another layout a few years down the road when I'm at another Army duty station.

Any thoughts on this sketch?

Continuous run

Nice plan Alex.  Simple, but with plenty of operational possibilities.

Since you're modeling modern times, have you considered including some abandoned spurs?  Perhaps against the backdrop behind your team track, or in the foreground in front of Purina?  In my opinion, they're an interesting way to show some history behind your prototype.

I can understand your concerns there.  For some reason, I've always wanted my layout plans to have a continuous run option, but when I think back to the last time I actually used it on my current layout, I realize it's been probably 5+ years at least.  Honestly, I think it's kind of a security blanket for me.   I'd probably continue to design it into future layouts if it allowed me to have shared staging on both ends, meaning through trains would re-stage themselves.

Late to the party

I see that you want some modularity but I'd suggest getting away from track parallel to the front or rear of the sections. 

By pulling the end of the line toward the facia at the Purina Mills end there should be room behind the elevator to model an unloading ramp and a transition to beyond. 

Doing the same at the other end will pull the curve more toward the room and allow for transfer staging on some door guides, open up the lumber yard and ...

... Consider the Genex track as another mainline that might cross and provide an interchange track. 

The chemical track spur could be straightened to allow easier coupling and an excuse to cross the interchange to work this industry - slow things down with permissions and imaginary schedule for the other line. 

Life I were starting over this would be a great layout to spend years detailing and operating. 

Neil E

Abandoned Track

I had considered that, I'm glad you agree.  I do plan on adding some abandoned track, maybe even having the team track abandoned on the other side of the road (where it dead ends in the plan), but with the road paved over the rails.  

Interesting Operation Ideas

A couple ideas I've had for improving operational interest since its such a small layout:

Purina Mills in Oklahoma City (the prototype) uses a Trackmobile to move hoppers and tank cars around their facility, so that would be cool addition in my version.  The Trackmobile would do its switching before the "Deep Fork Job" appears from the staging cassette to do its work.

The train crew has to clear any movement of cars at Norwesco with personnel at the plant before accessing the lumber yard.  Since the lumber yard recieves cars more often than Norwesco, this is annoying for the railroad crews but fun for me.  There's talk of adding a switch to make the lumber yard spur separate as their traffic increases (all those cookie-cutter suburbs being built in the area) but it hasn't happened.  If Norwesco is still loading/unloading cars when the switch crew shows up, the train will do its work and tie down (Me going into the other room to have dinner with the wife) and then come back in the evening when plant operations are done for the day at Norwesco and spot the cars at the lumberyard.

A-OK does a lot of frack sand business, so the team track will be filled with two-bay hoppers most days.  Since Genex recieves box cars only once a month or so, its spur will usually be filled with more frack sand hoppers.  The switch crew may even roll up the spur with light power once in awhile to move frack sand hoppers around (A-OK is well known for its customer service).  On a rare occasion that the main runaround is filled with frack sand loads, the crew will have to use the Purina runaround, which will of course be a pain in the neck for them.

The Oklahoma Railway Museum is located on this same former MKT track in real life (closer to downtown than the fictional part I'm modeling) so a special excursion could make it up here every once in awhile.  That would give me a reason to run a Frisco painted F unit or MKT painted switcher with a few passenger cars every once in awhile.

Thoughts on those little scenarios to make the usual switching a little more fun?

Trackmobile

Just one thought on the Trackmobile:  I used to own one, but a couple of things prompted me to sell it:  Erratic pickup, and lack of sound.  Since I understand that you're modeling this as a proto-freelance subject, could you substitute a Bachmann 45-tonner, such as the one about which I wrote at  https://forum.mrhmag.com/post/iaiss-west-end-a-45tonner-for-harlan-elevator-12201698 ?  I found it to be a far better runner than the BLI Trackmobile (better pickup and a very smooth drive), it's possible to add sound to it...and it's got those cool working siderods!  I've really enjoyed mine.