SS454 - First ever layout

[SS454]

Since my mind keeps thinking about building an N scale layout, I went ahead and started to buy some materials. I currently have nothing in terms of trains or scenery, just the 1 piece of flex track for test purposes.

I bought a 4x8 sheet of plywood which I had cut in half. I started to think that 4x8 is quite large, so I can now do 4x8, 2x8, or an L shape of both 2x8s. Unfortunately I think 2x16 is too long for my basement. Right now I think an L shape layout is the way to go, and I can make it modular with two 2x8 sections. I also picked up some 2x8 1/2" foam which I will lay the entire surface with. This will all me to have some material to go below grade with, which to scale would be 6.66 feet of depth. I may have preferred to get 1" thick foam, but it was more than double the cost.

It will be CP or CN freight train
Code 55 track



Any ideas or suggestions, let me know.

[KevM]

Do you have any preferences for what you want in a layout?

Continous Loop? Point to Point switching layout?
Looking into switch operation or just want to watch trains run?
Era?
Locale?

Would help people give you suggestions for your first layout if they have an idea what you are looking for in your layout.

[SS454]

This is the current idea I am going to play with. 2 mainline tracks that route around the back of the layout that will be covered by a backdrop. The loops are 11" radius outside, and roughly 9.5" inside.

I would like to do a bit of a rail yard with an engine house. Maybe some industrial like a scrap yard, or grain elevator. Definitely some switch operation.

If I go CP, then it's late 80s to mid 90s. I really like the multimark (pacman) stuff as that is what I grew up with as a youngster. This could extend from British Columbia to Alberta.
If I go CN, then I could be all the way up to modern. But I would still like to run some SD40-2's. This would be the northern Alberta scene.

[Rook]

There are some freeware options for layout planning. I use XTrkCAD and SCARM. John Armstrong Track Planning for Realistic Operation is a good read.

[OTFan]

What @Rook said; specifically the book by John Armstrong and planning software. Anyrail also has a free trial version, and is my personal preference, but it's a matter of personal preference.

Also, I would strongly suggest keeping your minimum radius to 11 inches or greater. In this case, that means having each end of the layout bulge out to accommodate a larger 180 degree curve, and is sometimes called a "dogbone" style of layout (or bent dogbone for something L shape). You will have fewer issues and be able to run more types of equipment. Your inside radius would be 11", and outside about 12.5".

I would also suggest an easement leading into those curves. Strictly speaking an easement spirals from straight track down to the radius of the curve you are using. If you don't do exactly that, you can achieve much the same thing by using a section of track with a larger radius leading into / out of those 180 degree curves. This helps ease the transition into the curve, and will help with running longer equipment (long locos, autoracks, passenger equipmnent, etc) in particular. Even if you don't think you are concerned with long equipment I'd still suggest this - it will make things run a little smoother and you never know what interests might develop later.

[Scotian_Huntress]

Take a look at this website for inspiration
http://www.bcrdawsonsub.ca/index.php

[Allen H.]

Take a look at this website for inspiration
http://www.bcrdawsonsub.ca/index.php

Tim's layout is pretty danged awesome! Simple and clean.
I've been following along on his site for years and on another forum.

[SS454]

I have adjusted my autocad template with some 3 inch x 2 foot outriggers to allow for larger radius turns on the ends. I am also considering going to just a single line around the backside, and having 2 curved turnouts that make it into basically 2 mainlines. This would save me at least $50 in track that I don't see anyways.

If I do keep a full 2 mainline layout, I am trying to think of a way to make the tracks cross each other. I don't want an 8-10* grade, but a bridge/overpass would be the best way to do it. The end result would be a 2 unique paths a train could travel over the course of a full loop of the layout.

[OTFan]

I'm no layout design expert, but the idea of having one track cross over the other opens up a lot of possibilities for a much different looking layout, where the two tracks do not parallel each other most of the time. Two parallel tracks brings to mind a single railroad operating them, but there is enough traffic to justify a double tracked line. Two very different routes brings to mind two different railroads, or maybe what used to be two railroads before a merger or buy out. It just depends on what kind of overall theme and look most appeals to you.

[SS454]

I'm no layout design expert, but the idea of having one track cross over the other opens up a lot of possibilities for a much different looking layout, where the two tracks do not parallel each other most of the time. Two parallel tracks brings to mind a single railroad operating them, but there is enough traffic to justify a double tracked line. Two very different routes brings to mind two different railroads, or maybe what used to be two railroads before a merger or buy out. It just depends on what kind of overall theme and look most appeals to you.

That is another good way to look at it. In some ways it would also mean I could run CN and CP together, however I want my yard/engine house to be a single brand. While I thought 2 separate routes would simply look cool, I could make it so each route would have it's own set of industry and spurs. Definitely something to think about.

[SS454]

Built the frame. Still need to shim the legs to level it. I'll likely put a back leg on too, but I ran out of lumber. Need to figure out if I should build the backdrop and then foam, or glue the foam and put the backdrop on top.

[WP&P]

The long tracks along the rear edges are hard to deal with, scenically, unless you plan on hiding them. You could perhaps use these as staging tracks, maybe add one or two more, and put them behind a low "horizon backdrop", which is just a backdrop panel that has no sky (it goes up to the tops of trees or buildings, while the sky is on the far wall beyond). You can still reach a hand over the horizon in order to access those tracks, but from all normal viewing angles they are hidden. This would mean that you're not seeing your trains for half of their journey, but that can mean a better sense of traveling in one direction rather than looping orbits.

Another way to hide tracks is by putting them in a tunnel, but I would advise against it due to the lack of access you'd have, based on how you've built solid tabletops already. With cookie-cutter construction you might have had gaps between joists whereby you could reach up from below to get to a tunnel track; I suppose it is still possible for you to cut access holes in your benchwork now before track goes down, if you want to plan in some tunnels.

If you don't want to use half your loop as hidden staging, then I'd suggest letting the rear mains bend forward, and trade places with the front tracks for a bit, especially in the corner. This means adding some gradient to get tracks up and over themselves. You can have the rear tracks be right up in the foreground in the corner, with the front tracks plunging into the background, possibly going into a tunnel (if you deal with the access issue). Doing this would allow you to focus on the "rear" tracks which can have a really broad radius and lots of space for a scene to develop in the corner. The "front" tracks get their focal points at each end, thus giving you a layout that features three "places" or scenes for your main to pass through.

I did a layout plan that takes up about the same amount of space as your benchwork (not exactly) and which was built around this premise of having the main line cross from background to foreground and back again. I will post it here for illustrative purposes; your benchwork configuration would mean this would need to be mirrored if you actually wanted to try this. Also, you'd need to add on about a foot and half to the end of the 8' leg. So I'm not proposing that you build this necessarily.



If you want to read more about the specifics of the design, it's posted on my web page: Anthracite Creek Layout Plan

[SS454]

@WP&P Thanks for the layout idea. The rear tracks will be hidden by a backdrop for sure. I am debating even going down to single track. I will make several layout plans and likely even start laying some track before making final decision. I think I need to buy some structures to properly know how to setup.

[Rook]

Need to figure out if I should build the backdrop and then foam, or glue the foam and put the backdrop on top.

That is a good question. Not sure I have ever noticed a low horizon backdrop as @WP&P mentioned. Bench looks ready for some test track. You've probably already thought how you might light everything.

[OTFan]

I think I need to buy some structures to properly know how to setup.

As an alternative to buying and building several structures, you can also mock them up with index cards or card stock to see how things fit. It can be as simple as a paper shape cut out in the dimensions of the building's footprint (most kits have the dimensions in the description somewhere), or you can also make the walls and roof.

[Ender]

@WP&P Thanks for the layout idea. The rear tracks will be hidden by a backdrop for sure. I am debating even going down to single track. I will make several layout plans and likely even start laying some track before making final decision. I think I need to buy some structures to properly know how to setup.

Be sure to keep some way to access any hidden track. That's where the derailments, crashes, and dirty tracks tend to hide.

[SS454]

As an alternative to buying and building several structures, you can also mock them up with index cards or card stock to see how things fit. It can be as simple as a paper shape cut out in the dimensions of the building's footprint (most kits have the dimensions in the description somewhere), or you can also make the walls and roof.

That was the original plan, but the couple of kits I looked at I didnt see any dimensions. Maybe I need to look a little harder.

[OTFan]

It's certainly possible (probable?) that some kits or structures don't have dimensions published anywhere. You may be able to find the dimensions by asking here or by contacting the manufacturer. Or, like you said, just get the kit, especially if you are sure it is something you want to use.

[SS454]

Since the floor of my basement was not level, I picked up these leveling pads off Amazon to try and make the layout base as level as possible. I felt the most important part was to get the 2 sections as true as possible as I intend to build this layout modular so if I ever relocate I can get it out of my basement. This meant my table height is 36 7/8", then add foam, and elevation changes. In hindsight I think 34" legs would have been more ideal, but its pretty good for standing or sitting.

https://amzn.to/2LJ0M27

To attach the two sections together I used some 1/2" bolts and alignment dowels. I then did some very minor sanding to make the two surfaces true. Now I need some track and structures.

[el Gato Gordo]

Nicely done!