A Blank Slate

Others with more layout design expertise will say more, I'm sure, but for starters you should consider wider aisles.  You say min 30" aisles.  Is that average width or choke point width?  If it's a choke point width, I'm cool with that, but you should consider a target width of 36-40" typical.  Again, I'm no expert, but I recommend also looking into the mushroom configuration given your room arrangement.  Joe Fugate is a big proponent of that style, and has well written articles about it in Model Railroader and on his personal website http://siskiyou-railfan.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.26 and, I suspect, in this forum.  It will take some time to get the concept at first, but it's really a cool way to go.  I have fit a three deck layout with a center peninsula in roughly the same space you have there, so anything's possible.  Disclaimer:  Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's practical (or sane!).

FWIW

Mike Lozensky

The mushroom came into my mind as well since you have a nice space much wider than 12 feet.

What's the distance from the floor to the ceiling in this space? 8 foot ceiling everywhere? Or are there any ceiling obstructions.

One thing the modern track designer needs to do is think in 3 dimensions, not just two.

Ceilings are 93" everywhere except under center support beam where height is 84". Image in post updated to show.

-a

Since the Original Poster is new to building large layouts and indicates that his preference is for a single deck layout, mushroom-style benchwork doesn't seem like the first recommendation I would make. It's one great way to make the most of some spaces, but the complexities of supporting the various decks and building a raised floor might not be ideal for his situation.

Given the relatively generous space he has available and the reasonable list of desired locations, a lot can be accomplished with a single deck layout plus staging. In fact, a single-deck layout in this space would be more than many have the time and resources to bring to completion.

Alan, you mention John Armstrong. The very best way to start, in my humble opinion, would be to spend some time in study of his book Track Planning for Realistic Operation. In particular, I'd suggest the chapters on choosing a benchwork "footprint" for the room, track planning schematics, and fitting the mainline to the space. These are chapters 7, 8, and 9 in my first edition copy, but may be numbered differently in the current third edition.

Best of luck.

Byron, I have nearly worn out the pages of Track Planning for Realistic Operation. You are so right in recommending it. It is an awesome book. I have sticky tabs stuck on many pages for fast reference when I am doodling track ideas.

The reference in my original post about being book smart is accurate. I am reading and re-reading everything I can get my hands on. I expect Kalmbach Publishing to send me a Christmas card this year for being such a good repeat customer! :)

Don't let the complexity of construction stifle the ideas. I have an engineering degree, 40+ years of hands-on construction experience with everything from framing houses to building concept cars for GM. If you have a great idea then I'll figure out how to get it built and built correctly.

My goal with the post was to see design ideas that offer excellent operational characteristics yet still reasonably comply with the stated druthers.

Thank you,

Don't let the complexity of construction stifle the ideas.

My feeling is that if a three-bedroom bungalow provides all you need to be happy, why start with plans for the Taj Mahal? But my preference is usually for layouts that are buildable, reliable, and reduce the MTTF (Mean Time to Fun). I know folks on forums have other views.

In my opinion, you can accomplish all you want in the single-deck design you originally indicated that you prefer. But if you feel differently, by all means investigate the complexities of multi-deck.

If you feel that you've garnered all you can from reading, I would suggest that you begin with Armstrong's by-the-squares sketching techniques and try variations on benchwork around the room with a long spiral peninsula to maximize use of the space while minimizing total curvature. Two "blobs" could be sufficient and would preserve walk-in access.

In my opinion, this process of sketching some "near scale" designs yourself will give you a better grasp of the trade-offs and possibilities in your space than you might glean from an "academic" review of others' ideas.

But if other folks have time to sketch things for you, I hope you'll find that useful, too.

After making the last post my thoughts wandered to it is not right for me to expect you to take me at my word regarding construction capabilities. So I offer a proof and also something really cool to look at under any circumstances.

For the past three years I have been a member of the team that built the VSR for Wayne Cherry, retired VP of Design GM. Check out the engineering and execution of design in this bad boy. Wayne pencil sketched his vision, we welded aluminum and cast fiber to make it real. My primary contribution was with the interior controls and finish work on the chassis. And to celebrate the VSR done and on its way to its first show we made a little movie.

If need be you may see the first ever TIG welded all high strength alloy benchwork on a model railroad! Just kidding of course.

The VSR
The VSR Build Movie

Enjoy!

The complexity of it all. In studying the available Basement floor space, the opportunity presented is fantastic, and, the desired portions of what you want to model (versus what you can achieve) in the next ten years should cause some caution on the part of the builder. Personal circumstance and such, have changed many plans mid-stream. I am supportive here, nothing more. The overall space suggests a walk-in type of plan for the 400 square feet that the LK&O will occupy. If only one of the three vignettes were to be selected, the Kitzmiller, Maryland, scene offers a focusable, dramatic "broad stroke" where the viewer walks into a central space that is a panarama, a scenic space, gently sweeping, from left-to-right along the river. The radius could be 120 inches and each "end" of the sweeping trackage could cleverly disappear into return loops of 60 inch radius and visible staging behind an above eye-level backdrop parallel with the rear walls. I am suggesting a free-standing, double-track dogbone, each loop with staging yard. Continuous runs, and a place to switch cars "up front". The rewards of just trying to construct such a thing, and, make it work will be terrific! Remember, whatever you actually achieve will be a wonderful thing. The lighting is what it is all about. The lighting. Good luck to you.

Rob,

I have given much thought to what you suggest. I have to admit it would be dramatic. The panorama of Kitzmiller would be breathtaking when stretched across my available space.

I see you have read the LK&O blog. The AC&Y Brittain Yard and close by industries scene I describe there is what I want to use as the primary focal point of my railroad. Granted it may not be as picturesque as Kitzmiller but it was my younger age railroad stomping grounds. It is where my interest in trains originated and as such has special meaning to me. Modeling 1960-1970 is deliberate since that was the time when I hung out at the AC&Y yard. Can you get another stroke of genius and suggest how I make the AC&Y scene as breathtaking as the Kitzmiller scene you describe?

Prior to your reply I had not given consideration to using Kitzmiller as the mainline. The prototype subdivision ends at the mines several miles SW of Kitzmiller. The double track you see on the Google image is actually a siding. Now that you have sparked the idea I must get back to doodling. Maybe I can have my cake and eat it too!

Thanks for the inspiration,

-a

Alan,

A striking feature of the Brittain AC&Y yard setting is the 'elongation'. The meandering creek is a scenic drainage element that is long and thin, like the rail road itself. The "backdrop" edge, is the highway. Are there sound walls? Are they graphittied? Could the ( balsa sound walls) be at, or above eye-level, could they 'screen' upper level return loop storage tracks? When you were first acquainted with the Brittain, did you view it from the overpass at the throat, or, did you approach from near the locomotive and grain silos, on the "city" side? I like to think linear, sweeping and simple. Model what prototype engineering practices you observe. Return to your yard sketches and think the way a professional engineer would. Least material, most performance. Try this exercise: design a double-ended yard to resemble Brittain; with only twelve switches. (Thats 12 points, 12 motors, 12 controls,etc.) you get the picture... A mini lifetime to make just that.

If you intend to operate like Bill Darnaby, or, Tony Custer, with every symbol freight and waybill, on a time card schedule, then my advise is to follow that, and use 112 switches, or whatever. However, I know simple. The same plan idea for Kitzmiller. Substitute Brittain. Here is another idea (not so dramatic). Design the yard you want as if it were CM&SF "dominos". Actually build a single "domino". If its good, build more, incorporating it into a "bigger picture" (like the original G&D). At any rate, If nothing comes together right away, don't fret. Build some more LK&O hoppers and weather them. Remember "Model Railroading is Fun!"

Alan, I posted my e-mail address on your blog. I do not have a web site, but, If you send me an off-line e-mail, I will scan a hand sketch of my impression of the LK&O and send to you as an idea.

Rob