I Agree...

...with whatever the layout owner feels works best for him or her.

Layouts are very personalized. What one may do with their layout, I may not with mine, and vice versa.

No big deal.

Andre

Blobs

A lot depends on what is being modeled, what the purpose of the blob is and how it fits in the space.

A blob can cover a return loop.  It can add  running distance.  It can be a view block.  It can create a deeper scene, creating a deep vista on an otherwise narrow bench or allowing tracks to curve away from the main  to create an industry at right angles to the main (or at least the viewer).  

On the other hand, if you are modeling Kansas,  or a city, a straight run might be more appropriate.  If the blob eats aisle space that could be better used for some other purpose or creates choke points in the aisle, then a blob wouldn't enhance the design.

I have a simple solution. I

I have a simple solution. I no longer get most kalmbach publications so I will never see the plan. However I can talk about blobs in layouts. A wise man, John Armstrong, recommended using as few of them as possible. He even went so far as to recommend a serpentine or spiral design to have less curved track. Now with that in mind you would need to decide what does the blob give you and what does it take away. 
For example a blob might allow a reverse loop or engine facility to name two possibilities. If that’s what it would be in your case do those features seem like a worthwhile addition to the layout and are the features important to you?

In my case I am working on a two level layout plus staging. I will have two blobs one at each end to contain a helix. There will also be a blob in  the middle on the upper level. This blob will be in the middle of the room and will have an aisle down the center of the blob allowing for access  from both sides. In this case it aids access, viewing, and adds some area under the top layout section for work spaces as well as controls and keeps them secluded. One other feature for me is it will provide a central viewing location that allows the entire layout to be viewed. For me this is a must have feature that will let me sit down and rail fan the layout with out moving.

Like beauty blobs are in the eye of the beholder. I hope this adds to your consideration of the feature of the track plan you are discussing.

Blob vs Pierced Peninsula

IMHO, there's two different items being discussed here concerning the plan that was posted.

In regards to that plan, the only personal item of concern for me was not the blob (the end of a peninsula), but that it was a "pierced peninsula" issue in that train leaves the operator behind as it moves to the other side of the peninsula, thus stranding the operator on the wrong side of the peninsula.The "pierced peninsula" feature was the deal-breaker for me with the blob plan, not the blob itself.

For me, peninsulas work great for layouts reflecting a mountainous setting. I also feel that the view blocking ability of a peninsula is a great tool for creating the feeling of being "out in the mountains" by preventing one from taking in the entire layout from any single vantage point.

Personally, I like peninsula's with their turn back "blobs" IF they are not pierced (thus stranding you from your train). If also used a view blocks, they break up the "vista view" of the entire layout, and in a mountainous setting, the view block nature of a peninsula can help create the sensation of "isolation" when operating.

What is a deal breaker for me on a track plan is when I see the "pierced peninsula" syndrome.

Andre

I'll toss my plan into this discussion

I can't see the Kalmbach plan originally referenced, but I've read and re-read John Armstrongs Track Planning book.  I assume blobs are the part of a track plan where the track does a 180 to turn back.

As Andre commented, I like blobs -  they can act as view blocks, they break up the "vista view" of the entire layout, and in a mountainous setting, the view block nature of a peninsula can help create the sensation of "isolation" when operating.

I designed my track plan to use as few as possible.  I can follow a train from where it exits staging all they way along to the main yard.  Of course Blobs are space eaters so need to be used strategically.  If I understand them correctly, I have 3.  One at the end of a peninsula, one down in the middle that affords two turn-backs, and at the bottom where a helix is planned.

Jim, I really like your plan

Jim, I really like your plan - I filed it in my list of "interesting plans" when I first saw it. I think it takes really clever advantage of the space, and it offers some lessons in particular with respect to blobs (which I hope you don't mind me sharing below!).

I haven't seen the plan from MR either, but a couple blob-thoughts building off of Jim's very nice plan:

- I'd say Jim's plan really has two blobs in the traditional sense, where the inside isn't used for track. Jim's third blob, the one at the bottom-end of the peninsula, is really clever because most of it is used for the inside-track's "turnback", but the jut-out portion creates an opportunity to have a deep scene without losing much if at all in other respects.

- In general, I think if you want a "walk-in" plan, you'll have a hard time getting away with any fewer than 2 blobs. However, by wrapping the track around like Jim has, you can get a lot of railroad mileage for those blobs, along with some nicely spaced deep scenes.

- Another lesson from Jim's plan is how to achieve the layout configuration while keeping aisleways nicely spaced, by cleverly routing the peninsula. In particular, he provided wide aisleways where two people are actually going to need to pass, such as at a meet location, and narrower elsewhere. In particular, if you keep enough space around the end of a peninsula, you can get away wih a bit of choke point on each side of the peninsula. I did this with my track plan as well (which I hope to share when I get a chance to draw it nicely).

- I echo Andre's thought that blobs are fine, but pierced peninsulas are better to avoid if possible.

Jim, your plan looks "just right" to me, and I imagine it took some plan revision to get it there? I know it'd take me quite a bit of graph paper to get to that point.

Givens and Druthers.

ssagrawal.  Thank you for the comments.  The blob at the bottom while it will have a helix and possibly a return loop for the bottom if I add that in, the top can be use as an industrial area for buildings and sidings.  The rest of the layout does not have many wide areas for buildings so this area can serve.  Priorities for this design was to have a long a mainline run as possible with decent minimum curve radii (32" minimum) and maintain mostly a single deck format.  I don't have tons of hobby time what with my wife perpetually doing DIY house re-modeling and me needing to participate, so I needed to keep this design from being overly complicated and time consuming - double deck would have been a bit too much.

I'm glad we now have the

I'm glad we now have the image to discuss as it gives a lot more content than the OP. The first thing to note here is that this blob serves a significant purpose which is to get enough linear feet to drop 4" and enter staging underneath. That alone changes the dynamics of "length of run."

It also allows for an extra industrial space and significantly more space for urban scenery. 

Edit: Never mind, misread the scale. Those curves are more than acceptable. 

Blob purpose

Judging by what's on the trackplan - a couple amtrack stations, a small yard, a few industries in two separate "towns", the goal of this trackplan is to have a layout that "feels" like the end of a branch line.  Assuming you don't want duckunders and removable sections blocking the window, closet, and entrance door the blob seems like a pretty good way to get that.

Closet

The designer wanted to maintain access to the closet, and having accepted that constraint and also wanting hidden staging, wasn’t left with many options. I probably would have opted for two visible staging tracks in the upper left corner near the closet, no blob, and a short stub end peninsula into the middle of the room with more switching.

The blob

I personally think that the Blob could function well for what it is.  The change in height that’s needed to make the blob useful could actually work great for some unusual scenery, say if, there was a canal present instead of what is there, it could have a Lock and Dam instead, maybe with a boat in the process of being raised and lowered 

After seeing the use and the

After seeing the use and the scenery involved that blob adds a great deal to the layout.

Missed scenic opportunity

I would build a "signature scene" for the layout in the center of the blob, directly in line with the entry door. Some sort of curved bridge crossing a small gorge or canyon. Otherwise to me, the layout would be scenically boring. That all depends on what your end goals are though.

Around the room?

My TT scale layout is in roughtly the same size room and I went around the walls for a longer run. With a bit more work I could have gone twice around for an even longer run. I built a lift out section for room and closet access and just put it in place if I want to run around the whole loop or I can operate point to point without the liftout in place. This blob design looks to me to be the most suitable for a self contained railroad like the New York harbor car float served terminals. The staging could be replaced by a carfloat bridge and dock scene....DaveB

Interesting

Interesting. I'm not a big fan of this blob personally. Perhaps it's because I'm a sucker for continuous runs, and I know I'd prefer a continuous run of some sort with a lift gate (They're not altogether hard to build, especially in comparison to the level of complexity the hidden staging introduces in this plan). So I'd just cede the left side of the room from the doors to the window, and use the right three-quarters of the room for a doughnut shape layout. Alternatively, I'd go for a walk-in with two blobs (which would fit in this space). But, to each their own! 

Changes to the plan

Hi,

yes, I agree there are some things with the track plan that could be changed, even though it is an interesting basic idea.

IMHO the main issues are the access to three turnouts, the thing Andre mentioned with leaving the train driver "stranded" and the narrow aisle. Obviously the closet door and window are in particularly impractical spots. For me, personally, it does seem to be just a bit crowded.

There are several options to change the plan, e.g. you could rotate the "blob" to the left and up. That would open up the narrow aisle at the cost of that upper left corner. With some moving of the turnouts you might even get them to a spot where they can be reached from the center aisle.

If it were me, however, I'd flip the blob, so that the industries and the passenger station switch place. Which would not leave me stranded. Then I'd go ahead and re-draw the plan for N scale. Which would allow the Blob to be narrower and add a bit of open running space between the scenes of the layout.

As Michael states, the Blob needs a signature scene.

It is quite obvious that the original plan needs to be adapted to the actual room (windows and doors) and to personal taste. Still, there is a very interesting track plan "in there" with a lot of potential.

Have fun and stay healthy

Blob

I think the layout loses a lot without the blob.  The thing I have an issue with is the vertical separation between the railroad and the canals.  To me that seems to be a scenically challenging feature.  The canal should be below the upper line but the lower line has to go under the canal so that means the lower line has to go lower than it would have to to clear the upper line.  From a scenic standpoint having part of the scene “below sea level “ seems odd. 

Single blob

I'm not a fan of the single blob. I'd either make a design where I could get a continuous or loop-to-loop run for letting a train orbit, or else I'd just go straight linear around the wall. I feel like this is too much of a compromise for not getting continuous run.

The canal height issue in interesting. Not something we'd see in the US, although Europe does have various elevated canals.

Elevated canals

The US has elevated canals too.  In Lowell, MA you can take a canal boat ride along the northern canal and look over the edge at the Merrimack river some 20 feet below.  There were once bridges where the Middlesex canal went over roads in places where it was elevated for a stretch.

review

at first I was a little confused by it... but looking at the plan more, I like it. 

why is lumber so expensive!?!

Amtrak Stations

Where do the passenger trains go, or come from?

Amtrak

Push-Pull from staging?

Yard

My unfinished basement is the same width (14’). 
I think the crossover in the yard is not to scale, but if I made this I could run the yard the full 14’ width. 
 

the only part I am struggling with is the lack of continuous running. Not so much for me, but when I play trains with the kids. 

Me too!

Of course, I am a great admirer of Dave’s TT Eastern Shore layout. 
 

As the Builder gets older, they are going to be a lot less happy on their arthritic knees loading and rerailing staging. 
 

The inability to follow the train around the blob is another deal killer, as others have have pointed out. 
 

Finally, constructing this layout in living space will create a constant mess. An around the walls layout can be built anywhere and installed when the dirty work is complete.