开云体育

Hey all,

I see there are no list archives so does that make me the first poster?

Here is my question...Would a segment of a larger layout qualify as a small
layout in terms of getting info/feedback on track planning for that area?
For example, I am currently planning the large basement layout; if I want
feedback and advice on say, design of one town or industrial area,
whatever, would that be OK for the list.

Good luck with the new list. I just may be considering a really small
layout someday, in N or HO, for a room of only 6 foot, 8 inches by 8
foot, 1inch with door in one narrow end. Would probably be double deck,
maybe triple (staging?).

Due to ongoing medical problems worst case scenario could keep me out of
basement or upstairs. The above could end up being my only alternative to
a layout - let's hope not! Would like to know it around eventually anyway
just for grins.



Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA
NMRA, BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club

Modeling the CB&Q & Illiniwek River Branch in HO - Circa early fall, 1969.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello everyone,
I'd like to start off by thanking Jonathan for starting up this list.
I also beleive that there is a definite need to discuss layouts
designed for less than commodious spaces. Selective compression takes
on a whole new meaning when you're trying to portray your "empire" in
less than 12 square feet!
As it stands right now, I'm restricted to about 8'x18" inclusive of
staging on a shelf in the "train closet". Challenging to say the
least. Compare that to Paul's "really" small layout room. One man's
trash...:>)
I recall reading an article in the Gazette about a micro layout
contest, but I don't remember what the definition was. Anybody?
Lately, I've been very pleased with the focus in MR and MRP on smaller
layout designs and operation. Being a member of the BMRNA, I am
heavily influenced by British practice which caters nicely to small
space layouts. You see alot of double slips and 3 way points onstage
and cassettes, sector plates and traversers in the fiddle yards to
save on space.
I'm looking forward to discussing anything and everything to do with
small layouts!
Cheers,
Jeff Hatcher
Richmond,
British Columbia

Thanks Jon,
I took a look at your TH&B site. Very nice!
I think that your 10'x12'room should give you ample space
for the compact switching arrangements of the prototype.
What do you envision as a typical "day" on the layout?
Having worked in such a restricted space for so long, I can't
imagine what I would do if I had more space than that. Panic, I
suppose, or build a series of small layouts at the same time to
satisfy my various international interests.
In my past experience, large spaces lead to grandiose plans that end
up as plywood pacifics just before being scrapped.
BTW, I found that article in the Sept/Oct'99 Gazette on micro layouts.
Although my space wouldn't qualify as a micro, it is still very
restricting and requires special attention to maximize enjoyment.
You mentioned you would like to see some small layout ideas in a mini
article format. Well, here goes:
One of the ideas I've been toying with involves a two-in-one style
of shelf layout first introduced by Dave Carson in the 1987 Scale
Model Trains. Most recently, it has re-appeared in a Model Railways
article by Julian Andrews, who has recently made his mark in MR.
It's not for everybody, but if you can't decide on any one prototype,
and would like an interesting exhibition layout, it might be fun.
Here's the concept:
You take the shelf and divide it in half. On one half you place the
backdrop at the back. On the other half, you place it at the front.
You design a simple connecting track plan for the shelf but the 2
halves/sides are isolated. Detail to suit. It could look like this:



.....................................
*
############### * #########################
# #
##############################################################
#
########### *
*
.............................***

"" is the backdrop
"#####" is the track
"....." is the shelf

When you're operating on one side, the other is shielded and can be
used as a fiddle yard for staging trains. Plus, as the two scenes
are completely separate, so too may be the locales.
For instance, I could be modeling part of an urban yard in Hamilton
on one side, and a branch line or MPD in Mexico on the other side.
Or, to kick it up a notch, I could model one side in HO and another
in
On30" just to try my hand at the scale. If that's too much of a
stretch, model 2 distinct locations on your favourite road. Ian Rice
discussed the use of connected "separate" scenes. Consider this the
condensed version!
The benefits:
1) Pretty quick and easy to construct. Small enough to try handlaying
track if you've thought you'd like to take a crack.
2) Chance to try new and interesting scenic techiques without straying
from your "main" layout.
3) Chance to research and model a different road/scale/location
without significant time/cost outlay.
4) Some operational ability. Well, enough to elevate it from diorama
status at least!
5) It's a real eyecatcher! Especially if handlaying, structures or
superdetailing is your forte.
The detriments:
1) It could look pretty cheesy.
2) Limited operations, but hey, how much more could you do in that
amount of space anyway?
3) See #1 :^)

In the articles, the shelf is only 3-4' long and it swivels on a
"lazy
susan" type item. If I was going to do it, I think I would construct
two 4' modules and connect them with one flowing backdrop and the 2
separate scenes facing in the same direction. To hide the "fiddle
yard" I would construct some type of black sliding door at the front
to move back and forth. I don't think I'd want to swivel 8' of layout
at a show! Plus I could still operate it from a shelf against the
wall
at home.
There you have it, maximum diversity and challenge in minimal space!
Now, where did I put those Mexican Pentrex videos????

Jeff Hatcher
Richmond, BC

Hello --

Thanks to Jeff for posting the idea on two-sided layouts.

Jeff included some ASCII art in his e-mail that gave me some ideas. I've
sketched a design for a 2-by-8-foot layout based on Jeff's ideas and have
posted it at --



I could see these layouts being fantastic exercises in building very
detailed structures and equipment. This apporach seems to me to have a lot
of potential!

Thanks --

Jon Piasecki
jonp@...

Just wanted to wish you all compliments of the season!
I just logged onto an interesting N scale group called
n_tutorial@... which is run by a fellow from South Africa.
The idea of the list is to discuss all issues surrounding
layout design and creation. The webmaster, Mr. Roper, has
a website that describes the building of a beginners layout
in N scale starting from a simple oval and becoming progressively
more complex until the end product results in:
-a classification yard
-passing sidings
-an interchange off site
-a small "timesaver" style arrangement for switching, and
-a team track
All in 3X5' which I think would qualify as a small layout design.
The arrangement makes use of a central divider and there is a slight
variation being completed on a hollow core door which includes all the
above and a removable barge to boot!
It's not the be all/end all of design but it's not a bad introduction
for any scale. Best of all, some of the list are working on the layout
in various stages and are posting photos to log their progress.
I'd be intersted to hear your thoughts on that layout design.
FYI, I also see that Tony K is putting out feelers for beginnerlayout
designs on a 4x8 that offer better operating potential than those
usually found in the proprietary books. Selected plans may find their
way into MRP 2002.
Jeff Hatcher
Richmond, B.C.

Hello All --

When I started small-layout-design, I wanted to build a list that
would focus on just that -- the design of small model railroad
layouts.

Unfortunately, I've not found the time to get the list going with
some content. I had planned to build a website to support this list
that would inspire some in-depth contributions from other list
members -- I was thinking of a listing of magazine articles dealing
with small layout, module and diorama design and construction, along
with some track plans that I've come up with or modified from
previously published plans. I was hoping that this sort of thing
would inspire list members to document their work and also post
articles and photos to the site. But, sadly, I've not had the time
do to this.

Also, there have been developments on other lists that have lessened
what I saw as the immediate need for this list: LDSIG opened itself
to non-SIG members, and MRyDesign has started to develop in a
promising way.

If you're not already a member of MRyDesign, please check it out at --



MRyDesign is working on adjusting its focus and I think the
dicussions about the list's vision and scope look promising. So,
take a look if you haven't already.

I'm going to keep small-layout-design around as I kinda like the
name! Also, as my time permits and should the other layout design
lists wander off into topics that no longer interest me, I'll work to
get the list going.

If you have material that you'd like to submit and have posted on the
SLD website, let me know -- maybe we can jump-start the list.

In the meantime -- stay tuned, as they say.

Thanks --

Jon Piasecki
jonp@...
Moderator, small-layout-design

I like the name too, and I think it has a place. I haven't had time
yet to upload anything yet, but I've have designed and built several
small layouts, and for us apartment dwellers, small layouts is our
only option. I will work on some things to post and/or upload.
Jack Seay

jonp@... said at 脪[small-layout-design] Status
of small-layout-design脫.
[Jan/05/2001Fri 09:33]

-Hello All --
-
-When I started small-layout-design, I wanted to build a list that
-would focus on just that -- the design of small model railroad
-layouts.
-
-Unfortunately, I've not found the time to get the list going with
-some content. I had planned to build a website to support this list
-that would inspire some in-depth contributions from other list
-members -- I was thinking of a listing of magazine articles dealing
-with small layout, module and diorama design and construction, along
-with some track plans that I've come up with or modified from
-previously published plans. I was hoping that this sort of thing
-would inspire list members to document their work and also post
-articles and photos to the site. But, sadly, I've not had the time
-do to this.
-
-Also, there have been developments on other lists that have lessened
-what I saw as the immediate need for this list: LDSIG opened itself
-to non-SIG members, and MRyDesign has started to develop in a
-promising way.
-
-If you're not already a member of MRyDesign, please check it out at -
--
-
-
-
-MRyDesign is working on adjusting its focus and I think the
-dicussions about the list's vision and scope look promising. So,
-take a look if you haven't already.
-
-I'm going to keep small-layout-design around as I kinda like the
-name! Also, as my time permits and should the other layout design
-lists wander off into topics that no longer interest me, I'll work
-to
-get the list going.
-
-If you have material that you'd like to submit and have posted on
-the
-SLD website, let me know -- maybe we can jump-start the list.
-
-In the meantime -- stay tuned, as they say.
-
-Thanks --
-
-Jon Piasecki
-jonp@...
-Moderator, small-layout-design
-
-
-
-
-____________________________________
-
-Small Layout Design Discussion Group
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

Hi everyone,
I really like the concept of this list.
As an apartment dweller myself I agree completely with Jack's
comment,for the most part, that small layouts are our only option.
Of course, one could always participate in a larger club layout
if the time and inclination were there, but that isn't the point.
The point is this: Small layouts are excellent,and by no means should
be seen as a default to "real layouts", which often seems to be the
prevalent view on the various lists. Unfortunately, most folks aren't
interested in chatting about the construction and operation of a
"small layout". They want to talk about the dream layout that they'll
build some day with Class 1 operations to suit a gizillion operators.
And if, by some stroke of fate, these pundits actually get off their
duff and build something,IMO, their chances of realizing their dream
before money, time or frustration does them in is remote.
Enter the small layout, where less really is more and a longer length
of run does not equate to superior modelling. Anyone can build a
small
layout with minimal time,cost or skills. If you like it;great, if
not,
learn and move on. It's small enough to scrap without agonizing over
it. You get better each time and you get to model what strikes your
current fancy. No second mortgages to convert scales/eras!
Jon states that:
"MRyDesign is working on adjusting its focus and I think the
dicussions about the list's vision and scope look promising. So,
take a look if you haven't already."
This is true. It certainly seems more focussed than LDSIG. However,
I couldn't help but notice that the reply on a recent request for
suggestions on a "small" 6x10 layout (I should be so lucky) started
with ideas on how to enlarge the available size first! Old habits die
hard I guess. I may be mistaken, but I haven't seen any layouts
discussed on MRyDesign that were under 30 square feet.
Ok, I'm stepping off the soapbox :>).
Jon, let's keep the list going. I'm more than ready to talk about any
thing related to small layouts. Here are some topics I'd like to talk
about:
-Clever space savings designs. Does anyone use sector
plates/traversers/cassettes. How about 3 way turnouts?
- What sort of prototypes lend themselves to small layout operations.
Has anyone applied these operations to a free lance theme?
-Has anyone designed their layout for exhibitions? How did it go?
What design and materials were used? What would you do differently?
-What makes a "great" small layout?
-Tony K put out a challenge for a layout designed as a beginner's
first layout that offers/promotes realistic operation. Size is 4x8.
Does anyone have any thoughts on a design?
There's lots to talk about....let's start.
Jeff

My layout is a 7' x 4' cockpit-style layout based on one of the plans in
Iain Rice's book "Small, Smart, and Practical Layouts". It will eventually
grow on either end. Even though I live in a house, I have no basement (not
seimically sound in my neighborhood) and have to share the 10' x 10' extra
room as the home office. Another design consideration was that we are
planning on moving in a couple of years, so I thought I would start small,
keep it transportable, and learn as I went.

The benchwork is complete. I used 1" x 4" for the frame, 1/4" plywood for
the decking, 2" x 2" for legs (braced with leftover 1" x 4"). Blue foam was
secured to the plywood with Liquid Nails. I haven't installed any roadbed
yet because I'm playing with the track plan using actual track. I used 3rd
Plan-It for the initial design, but there's nothing like a little actual
operation to work out kinks in the design. I've laid the track right on the
blue foam and used track nails to tack it in place so I can operate. This
has caused me to re-design my plan from what I've published on my web site.
I need to update the track plan and also upload some new photos. Be
forewarned that some of the photos may take a couple of minutes to download
if you are on a slow dial-up connection.

My wife loves to build Campbell-style kits (which she could do during the
apartment years), and we have a few already to go when the scenery gets a
little further along. BTW, I have placed the kits on the blue foam as a part
of testing operations. Made a difference in the track plan. I discovered
that I had too much track and my buildings were in less than ideal places.
For example, she had constructed Campbell's "Brett's Brewery" and it looked
great. The original draft of the plan would have put this kit back in the
corner where one couldn't admire all the detail and work she put into it, so
I moved it to a more prominent location on the layout, the trade-off being
that the track is on the far side of the building. So until I get a walk
around throttle, I have to literally look through the brewery's lower floor
to spot the car (which is easy if you also leave the box car's door open:
align the daylight). Little things like this have convinced me that
"operationing your plan" early will make for a better layout.

Feel free to check out what's currently on the web site now and check back
every so often because I do update it at least once a week. The URL is:



Joseph R. Curtis
Superintendent & Shay Driver
Mendocino Coast Lumber & Railroad Company

Jon Piasecki <jonp@...> wrote:

When I started small-layout-design, I wanted to build a list that
would focus on just that -- the design of small model railroad
layouts.

<snip>

I'm going to keep small-layout-design around as I kinda like the
name! Also, as my time permits and should the other layout design
lists wander off into topics that no longer interest me, I'll work to
get the list going.

Keep the list going, Jon. I think it definitely has a distinctive, stand alone niche.


Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA .
NMRA, BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Modeling the CB&Q & Illiniwek River Branch in HO ~ Circa late 1960's.
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Jeffrey Hatcher" <thehatchers@...> wrote:

As an apartment dweller myself I agree completely with Jack's
comment,for the most part, that small layouts are our only option.

What Jeff says is true of course. But what came to my mind is the small layout as maybe the only option for people with various forms of disabilities or mobility limitations as well.

The point is this: Small layouts are excellent,and by no means should
be seen as a default to "real layouts", which often seems to be the
prevalent view on the various lists.

<snip>

Enter the small layout, where less really is more and a longer length
of run does not equate to superior modelling.

You know, this got me thinking. I have toyed with the idea of making a smaller, island type layout in the basement instead of trying to fill every space with the so called, every square inch filling dream layout. Apparently I too have been conditioned to think that more is more as the first thing that comes to mind is now what do I have to give up, what will I be losing if I pursue the smaller pike (now there's a word you don't see everyday). One focus of this list should be to promote the idea that the smaller layout can be a _complete_ layout in itself and not just a compromise or only viable as a beginner's layout (sorry Mr. K.). OTOH, I would hate to see this list become a forum for bashing large, basement filling layouts. A small layout can and should be a viable , complete alternative to that. There is a real place for both configurations and all should keep that in mind.



Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA .
NMRA, BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Modeling the CB&Q & Illiniwek River Branch in HO ~ Circa late 1960's.
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hi Paul,

You wrote:

You know, this got me thinking. I have toyed with the idea of making a
smaller, island type layout in the basement instead of trying to fill every
space with the so called, every square inch filling dream
layout. Apparently I too have been conditioned to think that more is more
as the first thing that comes to mind is now what do I have to give up,
what will I be losing if I pursue the smaller pike (now there's a word you
don't see everyday).

It certainly isn't, but it's a fitting term nonetheless! My guess is that you
wouldn't
be giving up anything. If you started with the small PIKE and liked what
resulted,
you are in the enviable position of being able to expand. You'd likely get up
and
running trains much faster, and would be able to gauge how much trains is
"enough"
for one person to maintain and keep clean before getting in over your head.
OTOH,
you may discover that you've made a little gem of a layout, and enjoy telling
others
(like us) about the different techniques you used.

One focus of this list should be to promote the idea
that the smaller layout can be a _complete_ layout in itself and not just a
compromise or only viable as a beginner's layout (sorry Mr. K.).

I don't think Mr. K. would mind. He's penned a few good small layout ideas
himself
(see MRP 1995: Wingate, Ind.).

OTOH, I
would hate to see this list become a forum for bashing large, basement
filling layouts. A small layout can and should be a viable , complete
alternative to that. There is a real place for both configurations and all
should keep that in mind.

Well said! I realize that in addition to stepping off my soapbox, I should have
put
my sledgehammer down as well 8^) . I don't want to bash those layouts, or those
that have
made them. It takes a tremendous effort to stay that dedicated to a project, and

the folks that can are to be admired. Although design principles aren't
exclusive
to larger layouts, it seems this is the last bastion for such discussions on the
smaller
layouts.

Jeff

Hello --

Paul K. wrote --

You know, this got me thinking. I have toyed with the
idea of making a smaller, island type layout in
the basement ...

This comment made me think of a post from Jeff Hatcher (Message
Number 4 in the archives) about small layouts and his idea for a two-
scene layout divided by a view block. I liked the idea and drew up a
quick track plan to further illustrate Jeff's idea. You can see it at



This sort of layout could be just the thing Paul's looking for:
small, compact, moveable-around-the-basement. Two scenes could let
you explore two different modelling styles -- say, urban on one side
and rural on the other.

Such a layout could be made more operationally interesting by adding
drop-leaf staging tracks at either end: the staging tracks would be
raised and locked into position for operating sessions, then folded
down when you wanted to move the layout away for storage. In a
smaller scale like N, you might even get a reversing loop in a 2-foot
wide drop-leaf so you could have continuous running. The tight
radius needed probably would not look too good, but keep in mind that
what's on the drop leaf need only be functional and not scenicked.

The double-scene layout would make an excellent island layout -- it
would be ideal for operating and viewing from both sides. I think it
would make for an impressive display or exhibition layout.

Actually... I belong to a railway historical society that could
really use a small, portable layout that features scenes from the
railroad. This approach might be very useful for them -- in a small
layout, you could get a couple of interesting scenes that would be
small enough to be able to be completed to a high level of detail
fairly quickly.

Would anyone out there be interested in sketching a workable track
plan for such a layout? If anyone comes up with something, let us
know and I'll post it on the SLD website.

Thanks -- Jon Piasecki

jonp@...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo Railway
Hisorical Society Website at --


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Hi Jon,

Sounds interesting!
Just a couple of quick questions:
1) Are you talking HO or N scale for your society layout?
2) Are there specific scenes that the Society would want modelled, or do we
pick anything
from the TH&B website?
3) How accurate does the tack arrangement have to be in comparison to the
survey maps?
4) What are your rough dimensions for size and weight (specifically what are
you going to move it in?)
5) What would be an acceptable train length for the display/layout?
Thanks,
Jeff Hatcher

In a smaller scale like N, you might even get a reversing loop in a
2-foot
wide drop-leaf so you could have continuous running. The tight
radius needed probably would not look too good, but keep in mind that
what's on the drop leaf need only be functional and not scenicked.

The double-scene layout would make an excellent island layout -- it
would be ideal for operating and viewing from both sides. I think it
would make for an impressive display or exhibition layout.

Would anyone out there be interested in sketching a workable track
plan for such a layout? If anyone comes up with something, let us
know and I'll post it on the SLD website.

Thanks -- Jon Piasecki

jonp@...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo Railway
Hisorical Society Website at --


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Hello Jeff --

I guess I was a little unclear about the society layout thing and
asking people about double-sided layout designs.

What I meant to say was that if anyone had ANY 2-sided layout designs
that where interesting, they should let us know -- I was not asking
for TH&B-inspired designs in particular. Also, there's just not
enough information on the site yet to design a plan based on
prototype track arrangements.

So, the request is this: if anyone has any interesting two-sided
layout designs, based on any prototype or freelanced, let the list
know and we'll share them.

I'd be particularly interested if anyone can design such a layout
that would offer a lot of opertations in such a small space. Perhaps
someone knows of an operations-intensive prototype that would work
well on a very small layout.

If you're interested, here's some comments on the "specs" you asked
about -- I think these would apply to any two-sided layout that I
would want to be portable enough to be able to take to shows and
displays:

1) Are you talking HO or N scale for your society layout?

I was thinking of N scale as it would allow for a better proportioned
scene in the small space I figure the layout will occupy.

2) Are there specific scenes that the Society would want
modelled, or do we pick anything from the TH&B website?

Well, as I wrote above, there's not enough info on the site yet to
provide people with design information, so I can't ask anyone to come
up with something. If I were to build a layout for the society
myself, I know that there are two scenes in particular that I would
want to model -- Brantford Station and the pre-Art Deco Hamilton
Station, and those primarily for the architecture involved.

If the society were to decide by committee which scenes to model, I
think they would want (demand!) the Art Deco Hunter Street Station
(modern Hamilton Station) and the Chatham Street roundhouse and
service facilities. You can see the modern station and the
roundhouse on the TH&B In Photographs section of the site.

3) How accurate does the tack arrangement have to be ... ?

I think it should be fairly accurate. Track lengths will of course
be compressed, but the general arrangement should be pretty
accurate. I would take that approach with any layout, no matter what
it was based on. The scene-to-scene arrangement does not need to
be "sincere", as these are really two dioramas sitting back-to-back --
so I would not worry if, say, I got east and west mixed up between
the scenes.

Having tried to design layouts for different spaces and at different
times, I have found that it is much more rewarding to try to
duplicate a prototype arrangement -- freelanced yards and switching
puzzles just don't look right to me! So, I think I would try to
follow the prototype's actual alignment as much as possible, even if
I changed other elements in the scene, such as structures and scenery.

Also -- in looking at scenes on the TH&B, I have found several that I
just can't believe. They look so implausible that I would not try to
model them, as no-one would believe the arrangement really existed!
For an example of this, go to the TH&B site and click on Modelling
the TH&B. Check out Figure 1 in the Modelling Brantford article and
look at the mess of track around and leading to Waterous Ltd. No-one
would believe that on a model -- especially that passing siding
with "tail" just to the right of Waterous.

4) What are your rough dimensions for size and weight

(specifically what are > you going to move it in?)

I'd be moving my layout in a 2-door Dodge Shadow or a 4-door Chevy
Cavalier (with the back seat folded down in both). I think two 2-by-
4 foot "modules" would fit, as long as the height of the modules was
kept to a minimum. Structures and other details would be removed
from the layouts for transportation and carried in a separate box.
As for weight -- an average person should be able to remove the
layout from the vehicle. Wheels on the layout or a separate dolly
would save you from having to carry the layout. My guess is
that "domino" construction would be used.

5) What would be an acceptable train length for the

display/layout?

I think that depends -- for show use, these will be detailed display
modules rather than an operating layout. For personal operating
sessions, design for whatever you feel would be reasonable
considering the scene you're modelling. Keep in mind that these two-
sided layouts will mostly be switching layouts, and not
representations of main line runs -- although, if someone has a
design that could pull that off, let us know!

Thanks -- Jon

jonp@...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Visit the Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo Railway
Hisorical Society Website at --


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Hi everyone,
Here's a little gem of a layout that I saw on the LDSIG.
I'm referring to the two photos on Don Wetmore's Oak Hill
switching module.
I've just sent an email to Dave H. (who posted the gallery)
to get the dimensions.
I reckon it's about 2'x5'in HO. With the small detachable interchange
on the right, and the 2 crossings,it could easily occupy a few hours
of my time!
Nice assortment of industries as well.
Here's the link:



Cheers!
Jeff Hatcher
(Big interest in Small layouts)

Some more thoughts on this subject:

I was thinking the other day regarding the backdrop up the center. It's distance from the front edge of the layout could vary. This would allow a deep scene on one side versus a shallow one on the other - a city area on one side v. a mainline run between towns, etc. on the other, for example.

Another idea I used years ago when playing around with designs for a never built N-scale layout - on one side have your city area. Run the mainline near the end beneath a large, Union-type station or higher section of the city. Underneath this, and out of site, would be your turnback curve which also goes through the backdrop unseen and exits into a rural, or whatever scene on the other side. I think the layout size was something like four by twelve or sixteen feet.

Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA .
NMRA, BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Modeling the CB&Q & Illiniwek River Branch in HO ~ Circa late 1960's.
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It would seem like a good idea if not just to break up the geometry.

On some small layouts you see a focus on one side (usually the deep side) with
the
unscenicked staging relegated to the narrow area behind the backdrop. I recall
Andy Sperandeo designing
such a layout for an N scale layout that was 3.5x10' a few years back. What
caught my eye
in the design was the use of only one large industry (I think it was Notexpo, or
something like that)
with a ton of wide open scenery all around. It looked like it really captured
the area and would have
made an excellent layout for operation and photography. I don't remember the
exact location, but I think the artist's
rendering had some KCS units going through it.
OTOH, there was a MR project more recently (relatively speaking), that had a
deep front town scene
for switching with a scenicked staging area behind a hill. I think it was the
Red Wing Division of the
Soo. It seems to me that this increases the enjoyment across the board, so to
speak, by offering more
photographic and operating possibilities, although Andy's would have been fun to
photograph and operate
as well! I believe it was designed to have the back against the wall to save on
space
I remember one layout in MR had an operating fall scene on one side and a scenic
winter scene on the other.
Now that's an effective use of a backdrop/divider!
Jeff

Some more thoughts on this subject:

I was thinking the other day regarding the backdrop up the center. It's
distance from the front edge of the layout could vary. This would allow a
deep scene on one side versus a shallow one on the other - a city area on
one side v. a mainline run between towns, etc. on the other, for example.

Another idea I used years ago when playing around with designs for a never
built N-scale layout - on one side have your city area. Run the mainline
near the end beneath a large, Union-type station or higher section of the
city. Underneath this, and out of site, would be your turnback curve
which also goes through the backdrop unseen and exits into a rural, or
whatever scene on the other side. I think the layout size was something
like four by twelve or sixteen feet.

Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA .
NMRA, BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Modeling the CB&Q & Illiniwek River Branch in HO ~ Circa late 1960's.
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Hi Folks,
I haven't seen much on this list lately so I thought I'd
get some conversation going.
I just picked up the Ian Rice book "Small, Smart & Practical
Track Plans" and had a read through. Lots of good ideas though
the U.S. exchange is a killer!
I'd be interested in seeing what the rest of you think about it.
One thing that I found quite nifty was the Verticalia Belt line
which had switching layouts on 3 different levels connected by a
removable staging yard.
So, you could assemble your train on the top level classification
yard, run it onto the portable staging and connect it to the middle
level yard and carry out your tasks, then onto the staging yard and
down to the lower level to do your set out and pick ups, returning
to the top via staging with an entirely different consist for the
yard.
Coincidentally,I had just finished reading about David Barrow's final
thoughts on the South Plains District switching layout (MR Oct '97).
In that article he had devised a movable staging yard with the added
benefit of not having to have the layout sections connected, or even
in the same room.
It seems to me it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to merge the 2
ideas together: instead of moving the staging yard around on the
horizontal, you could put both sections on one wall with brackets and
simply move the staging yard vertically. The result: all the fun in a
fraction of the space!
As I've stated before, I model in a closet, literally, so this is
somewhat of a revelation for me in terms of the possibilities.
Thoughts, anyone?
Jeff

PROJECT L.U.C.I.D. - MICROCHIP - SYSTEM TO DESTROY THE FINAL "FREEDOMS" OF PEOPLE - WARNING !

DEAR FRIENDS,

WARNING YOU, EACH AND EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET EARTH, IN FACE OF ABSOLUTE INACTIVITY AND PASSIVITY, WHICH YOU'RE ARGUING WITH SO-CALLED WILD-CARD PROGRAMMES AS YOU ARE FROM APPROX. 95 % CONTROLLED BY THE SAURIANS (NEGATIVE EXTRATERRESTRIALS) WITH THEIR BOSSES - PSEUDOCREATORS AND ALSO EARTHLY HENCHMANS.

COME TO LIFE, AS LONG AS THE TIME IS YET, STOP BEING AFFECTED MARIONETTES, BEGIN YOURSELF TO ATTEND THIS AND NOTIFY ABOUT, WHAT'S THE GREATEST DANGER OF THIS SOCIETY.

NAMELY LOSS OF HUMANITY. BY YOUR ENDEAVOUR - NOT TO LET THE OTHER PEOPLE KNOW A L.U.C.I.D. PROJECT IS COMING INTO REALIZATION. THIS IS THE CONTROLLING SYSTEM FOR THE PEOPLE PER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SUPPLIED BY THE SAURIANS WITH PSEUDOCREATORS).

PLEASE, REMEMBER THE GEORGE ORWELL'S '1984' WRITING TO FINALLY OBSERVE THE EVIDENT PARALLELS. DUE TO KNOW THE BOTH COMUNIST AND CAPITALISTIC REGIME, THE PEOPLE IN THE EAST, WHERE IS MY ORIGIN, ARE ALREADY MORE SENSITIVE THAN IN THE WEST.

OUR CONTACT'S WITH A SPACE PEOPLE OF THE LIGHT ARE NOT A HOBBY, BUT NECESSARY OCCASION, LOOK TO THOSE THAT THERE ARE NOT A TRUE INFORMATION IN MEDIA AND THIS SOURCE (COMMON WITH CREATOR PRIMARY) IS ONLY TRUTHFUL. THERE IS MUCH VERIFICATION THERE, THE L.U.C.I.D PROJECT IS ONE OF THEM. -

TRY TO UNDERSTAND, AS FAR AS YOU DON'T FEEL THE PROBLEM, YOU CAN'T TO SOLVE IT. THAT IS BASIC PHILOSOPHY OF THE MAIN GLOBAL ACTING COMPANIES, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD NOT SURVIVE.

SO LONG AS YOU DON碩 CHANGE YOURSELVES IN BEHAVIOUR AND ACT - LOVE, GOOD, POSITIVE COGITATIONS - AND BY YOUR OWN FREE WILL - THE SAURIANS DON碩 SET YOU FREE, BECAUSE YOUR LOW VIBRATION MAKE IT POSSIBLE (LIES, WRONG, FABRICATION OF INFORMATION, CAREERISM, ENVY, FEAR, ETC.). ON INTELLIGENCE IQ 100 THE PEOPLE DON碩 HAVE A CHANCE TO UNDERSTAND, UNAIDED OF HIGHER INTELLIGENCE OF OPPOSITE INTENTION, THE SCHEMES OF THE DARK SIDE BASED ON IQ 200 !

WITHOUT YOURSELVES CHANGE YOU CAN碩 B R E A K THE MARIONETTE STATUS - BE ACTUATED PEOPLE ! ! !

HEREWITH YOU W O N � T BE ABLE TO GIVE A NOTICE ABOUT NOTHING, WHAT OR WHO WOULD GIVE THE GLAD HAND TO RESCUE PEOPLE ! ! !

SO, WE ARE WARNING YOU AGAIN UNTIL THE LITTLE TIME IS STILL YET, BUT THE LOTS OF PEOPLE HAVE TO REVERSE NOW !

IN THE OPPOSITE CASE THE CIVILIZATION WILL COME INTO SIMILAR MISERY, TRULLY DEMONSTRATED IN MATRIX MOVIE, AND SEVERAL OTHER.

I'AM AN INFORMATION SCIENCE, 15 YEARS WORKING IN SYSTEM CONTROL OF PRODUCTION AND QUALITY AND HAVING SENSITIVE INFORMATION OF INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES PLANS IN THE NEAR FUTURE. THE L.U.C.I.D. PROJECT COULD COME INTO PRACTISE IN NEXT 3-6 YEARS. THE EUROPEAN UNION IS JUST ONE OF THE SUBSUSTEMS OF THIS PROJECT - THAT'S WHY WE ARE FORCED TO A MEMBERSHIP WITH VIOLENCE (CZECH REP.).

THE IMF AND WORLD BANK HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE MICROCHIP PROJECT (TO IMPLEMENT AN ID AND CC ON RIGHT HAND OR TO FACE OF EACH TERRESTRIAL) BUT THE PRESSMANS HAD NO INTEREST TO COMMENT - A PROOF OF THEIR CONTROLLING. INSTEAD OF THIS THEY HUSTLED A FABRICATED NEWS TO MEDIA, CONDUCTED BY THE SAURIANS.

DETAILED INFORMATION ARE AVAILABLE AT "PROJECT L.U.C.I.D."

WHAT ARE ZONE OF DISPLACENEMT AND TRUE CREATION, WHAT ARE THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE STATES, WHO ARE PSEUDOCREATORS A THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, WHAT IS THE FULFILMENT OF THE NEGATIVE STATE (TOGETHER WITH L.U.C.I.D. PROJECT) AND LOTS OF LIFE IMPORTANT INFORMATION, WHICH WILL HELP YOU TO ORIENTATE YOURSELF IN THIS WORLD OF DISADVICES.

THAT WE ARE LIVING NOT IN TRUE CREATION, BUT IN THE ZONE OF DISPLACEMENT (A BIN OF THE TRUE CREATION) - AND THIS UNIVERSE IS A DESERT PRACTICALLY. THE TRUE CREATION IS ABSOLUTELLY FULL OF LIFE (THIS IS ONE OF THE FACTS, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST GIVES TO COGNIZE IN THIS WAY).

FURTHER YOU CAN FAMILIARIZE WITH ALL THE HISTORY OF THE NEGATIVE STATE, IT'S EFFECT (GUIDANCE WHAT NOT TO CHOICE), AND A HOW TO GET BACK TO THE TRUE CREATION. EVEN THIS, AS WE ARE HERE IN OUR OWN FREE WILL (DECISION IS UNCONSCIOUS MODE).

WHAT IS THE FIRST COMING OF THE PSEUDOCREATORS AND AFTERWARDS THE FIRST COMING OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND THE SECOND COMING OF THE PSEUDOCREATOR FOLLOWED BY THE SECOND COMING OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST?

TO EXPLAIN FURTHER WEIGHTY CONNECTIONS WE ADVICE YOU TO READ OVER THE 'NEW REVELATION OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST' - - IT IS IN DOWNLOADABLE FILES (MENU 11) AN IN BROWSING (MENU 6).

IT HAS BEEN SENT ON THE 11/28/00 TO THE PRESS, TV, BROADCAST AND GOVERNMENT IN CZECH AND SLOVAK REPUBLIC.

WHOM, WHO ARE CRITICALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SOLVING PROBLEM.

BUT IT HOLDS, IT WILL COME, WHAT THE PEOPLE WOULD ELECT. SAME AS WHENEVER EARLIER - THE LAW OF THE FREE WILL IS STILL FUNCTIONAL.

AS FAR AS YOU CAN CONTRIBUTE TO A DIFFUSION OF OUR INFORMATION (PRIMARILY FROM CZECH TO ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS) - INFO ON THE MAIN PAGE: 'SPONSORSHIP OF SPREADING INFORMATION.'

IVO A. BENDA AND THE COSMIC FRIENDS HAVE GIVEN THOSE INFORMATION TO YOU WITH LOVE.

HAND OVER THESE INFOS TO ALL EVERYWHERE - IT IS IMPORTANT ! ! !