My layout is mostly in storage

[aardvark]

I need help, and the benefit of united wisdom that is RMWeb.

 

I have been considering an OO-scale model of Banff, Scotland.  Design work suggests that the layout would be around 6 x 0.6m, including fiddleyard.

 

The problem is that I don’t have a 6m space to create it in.  I don’t have the benefit of a dedicated railway room or shed.  My assigned room is only 3.3 x 3.1m, and has to accommodate a number of other things besides the railway.  I don't really relish the thought of consigning all my hard work to the dust and general chaos of the garage. Smaller scales are discounted in consideration of advancing age, while lofts don't generally existing in Australia, where the outside daytime temperature can easily exceed 40°C during the summer.

 

My partially conceived plan is to build the layout on 5 or 6 baseboards of 1.0-1.2m each, stored in some sort of rack storage in my assigned room.  Periodically, I might win permission from the Minister of the Interior to erect and operate the layout in an open-plan hallway.  In stark contrast to many of the layouts featured on RMWeb or popular magazines, I might expect that the Banff layout would spend the majority of its life in the rack, with airings only on special occasions (birthdays, when she’s out).  So I need an arrangement that is easy to erect and dismantle single-handedly.

 

I’m hoping to hear from anyone who has been down the “my layout is mostly in storage” path.  Perhaps the whole approach is fraught with unimaginable difficulty and disappointment, in which case, it would be nice to learn from others.

 

An alternate would be a micro-layout, where everything fits on a single manageably-sized baseboard.  Perhaps this would be sufficient to satisfy my drive to create a layout: I have no idea.

 

I am heartened by an on-line article I’ve read recently from the 4 April 2014 issue of Model Rail Hobbyist magazine. (click either “Portrait” or “Landscape” to read the original article).  There are a number of different conversation threads in the associated comments, but the one of interest to me is the suggestion that one could create a layout one baseboard at a time, “down to the last wire, piece of track, ballast and scenery detail”.  Once the first baseboard is complete, one moves onto the second. 

 

As a beginner, this approach looks attractive in that I can tackle the various activities in quicker succession, with lower risk and initial cost.  Moreover, if I make a complete hash of things while climbing the dreaded learning curve, it’s not so much of a problem to re-do a single baseboard to fix things up.

 

To some extent, it would be like building a micro-layout, then adding a second micro-layout to it, just that the two would be designed to go together and to produce a cohesive layout.

[peter220950]

Hi,

 

I'm in a similar position, but on a much smaller scale, with my Exhibition layout. It has been up and down two or three times a week for the last three years, so if the following observations are of help.

 

I have cut out a lot of the problem of layout support by utilising what's already there in the room. Much of the time can be taken with putting up trestles and levelling things. I use existing furniture at each end with intermediate support from 600mm wide Spur shelving brackets on Wall mounted risers. It cuts down on storage needs and means I can just pop 2 brackets into place and start putting boards up. There is an added bonus in being able to work on a board at any level, which can save a bit of back ache.

 

 

 

 

It's worth taking time to consider what the boards are made of, how heavy they will be once complete, and how easy to handle. More damage has occurred in handling and storage than in use as a layout. Moving 1.2m x 600mm boards around, when there are scenic bits on top, is quite a challenge.

 

Storage is also something to consider, my boards are boxed when in store, to prevent damage experienced when bits fell on them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Face to face, and with full surrounds of plywood, they are now pretty invulnerable.

 

Working on one or two boards at a time, and working along the layout seems like a good plan, the only risks I can see are that your skills may improve as you work along, and you might not be able to match finishes. I think I would work along with track and wiring, then go back to the start and ballast and scenic, leaving things like static grass till last, and running back along the boards in one operation, but it's down to personal preference. If a couple of boards will work a a micro so much the better, as there's nothing like having a play to renew enthusiasm.

 

Summing up, I don't think there's any problem in what you propose to do except that the multiple handling is likely to cause more damage than a traditional layout, so plan to prevent it. Box boards if possible to help, make sure the boards are reasonably easy to handle, and spend time and money on good joint dowels, and threaded inserts to attach bits like back scenes to the boards, any hole a bolt passes through will wear much more quickly, so line with metal tube or similar to prevent the bolts filing them bigger.

 

Hope this helps, and good luck with the project.

 

Peter

 

[Chrisr40]

Hi aadvark, is there a possibility to configure it around the walls in semi circle rather than one long straight layout which it sounds like you have / are planning?

 

Chris

[Dagworth]

Have a look at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/94290-bow-locks-was-a-bit-on-the-side/

I have the same problems of not enough room to keep the layout(s) up permanently but having enough room to be able to have at least one board up for a few days to be able to do any work that needs time is crucial. As an example, ballasting needs (ideally two) boards up for long enough for the glue to dry thoroughly.

 

Andi

[aardvark]

Hi aadvark, is there a possibility to configure it around the walls in semi circle rather than one long straight layout which it sounds like you have / are planning?

 

Chris

 

Dunno - of course it wouldn't be prototypical, but it is worth some thinking as an option.  Running around 2 or 3 walls would mean running across a window or a built-in wardrobe.  Not impossible, but you have certainly suggested another option to consider.

 

thanks!

[aardvark]

Hi,

 

I'm in a similar position, but on a much smaller scale, with my Exhibition layout. It has been up and down two or three times a week for the last three years, so if the following observations are of help.

 

...

Storage is also something to consider, my boards are boxed when in store, to prevent damage experienced when bits fell on them.

 

Face to face, and with full surrounds of plywood, they are now pretty invulnerable.

 

Thanks Peter - it's quite comforting to think that there are others in this position, and that it is possible.  Your shared experience is quite valuable to me.

 

I am particularly surprised and intrigued by storing the baseboards face-to-face.   I understand the boxing idea from your pic, but I might have thought that there would be all sort of scenic bits and bobs that would come off when the baseboard is held in anything but it's normal orientation (flat).

 

Of course, I am a complete beginner, and happy to admit that there are any number of things that I have yet to understand.

[Dagworth]

Thanks Peter - it's quite comforting to think that there are others in this position, and that it is possible.  Your shared experience is quite valuable to me.

 

I am particularly surprised and intrigued by storing the baseboards face-to-face.   I understand the boxing idea from your pic, but I might have thought that there would be all sort of scenic bits and bobs that would come off when the baseboard is held in anything but it's normal orientation (flat).

 

Of course, I am a complete beginner, and happy to admit that there are any number of things that I have yet to understand.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/94290-bow-locks-was-a-bit-on-the-side/?p=1736116

 

Andi

[peter220950]

Thanks Peter - it's quite comforting to think that there are others in this position, and that it is possible.  Your shared experience is quite valuable to me.

 

I am particularly surprised and intrigued by storing the baseboards face-to-face.   I understand the boxing idea from your pic, but I might have thought that there would be all sort of scenic bits and bobs that would come off when the baseboard is held in anything but it's normal orientation (flat).

 

Of course, I am a complete beginner, and happy to admit that there are any number of things that I have yet to understand.

Most of the buildings are separate, and slot into the scenery, but there are a couple of ground floor bits that are permanently attached. This is mainly due to the height of a two storey factory in O gauge. It remains to be seen how well they will travel, but they seem pretty stable in everyday handling, the more you can fix, again the less damage you are likely to sustain to them. My buildings are in boxes to travel, and now take up more volume than the layout, so pose a further storage issue.

 

 

Just try to avoid heavy structures, foam cored board is useful as a building carcass, the scenic bits generally stay put as long as they are properly attached in the first place. - The boxing in also helps to keep dust off things, there's no reason why a lightweight foam core lid can't be used on individual boards if the structures are tall, they just give that protection from damage caused by sleeves leaning over and bits getting accidentally knocked onto the boards when in store.

 

Considering the station you are looking to model, there's not a lot of height in the buildings, and in many cases you might find the buildings fit together when boards are fixed together, the original scheme for my layout, by Gordon Gravett, assumed the buildings would stay in place when the boards folded together, but the overall weight and bulk were too much for my circumstances.

 

 

Having said all that the main reason I opted to box the layout was to carry it by car, that might not be relevant to you, so racking could be more suitable, it's something to think about and factor into your own situation. Boxing probably means more work, but they can easily be moved to store elsewhere, racking can mean a large fixture that causes it's own problems. Our Club O gauge layout uses fold up racks on casters that gives the best of both worlds, they don't take up much room when empty, but can be rolled around when full.

Peter

[aardvark]

...

 

 

...

 

Awesome information from you both!  I hadn't even thought about thinking about boxing, so it is another consideration on the way to a successful layout.

 

One more beginner question please: what would you expect to be  the finished weight of a 2' x 4' baseboard, fully scenic-ed?  I'm fully aware that this is a piece-of-string question, but any ballpark guestimate would be very much appreciated!

 

cheers!

[peter220950]

 

 

Just weight my boards, they are 13kgs each, with ballast, scenics and some building, in O gauge the buildings I have are probably equivalent to a full set in 00.

 

The boards are 1.200m x 686mm and based on 35mm flush doors, cut down to length, the starting weight for the bit of door used was about 5kgs, which gives some idea of the additional weight of track and scenics,

 

Hope this helps

 

Pete

[aardvark]

...

 

 

...

 

 

...

 

Eureka!

 

My plan had been to store all 6 baseboards in a single rack, and I had been assuming that the rack would be one baseboard wide and 6 high, but now I see that the rack could be the full width of my room (around 3m), and the same height as my desk.  This will allow 2 or 3 boards to be joined on the top of the rack, at a comfortable working height.  Moreover, there would be plenty of space under for the storage of the remaining boards.

 

The 3m length is actually ¾ of the scenic portion of the layout, and will mean that not only will it make working on the layout easier, but also mean that the fruits of my labour will be on display, and can be powered up, all without the need for permission from the Minister of the Interior.

 

A definite breakthrough, and all thanks to Andi, Chris and Pete.

 

Thanks gents!

[peter220950]

Glad it's working out for you

 

A final thought, based on experience with our Club layout racking, it's worth making the runners detachable, which will allow the gap between boards to be changed if you suddenly decide to add something to a board that makes it too tall for the rack.

 

It doesn't have to be anything more than fixing runners with screws rather than glueing, but it future proofs the storage for things you haven't yet thought of.

 

Peter

[Mike Storey]

Before you embark on a solution, I would earnestly suggest you think through what you want most from your layout. is it to be able to run trains or is your interest more in the construction of it? If the former, I strongly suggest you move to the garage so you can have it up and ready most of the time - you will be surprised how quickly you can bring order and make space when you need to. The dust/dirt issues can all be solved with covers. If the latter, then perhaps the storage rack solution is perfectly adequate.

 

I say this because so many comments on so many threads from people on this site refer to getting trains running asap, without which they lose interest. I know that feeling, which I why, in advance of building my intended layout depicting a real location which will take up a large part of an area that requires a lot of other work before it is ready, I have built a small, simple test set of boards, on which I can at least play trains for a while, but which has also allowed me to try out new types of track work, motors and controllers, and of course make sure that new purchases get an airing to check they work as advertised, and that existing stock can be tested when I have modified them (added chips, new couplings or whatever). Ironically, even that is now in storage for a bit, due to more building work....

[aardvark]

Before you embark on a solution, I would earnestly suggest you think through what you want most from your layout. is it to be able to run trains or is your interest more in the construction of it? If the former, I strongly suggest you move to the garage so you can have it up and ready most of the time - you will be surprised how quickly you can bring order and make space when you need to. The dust/dirt issues can all be solved with covers. If the latter, then perhaps the storage rack solution is perfectly adequate.

 

I say this because so many comments on so many threads from people on this site refer to getting trains running asap, without which they lose interest. I know that feeling, which I why, in advance of building my intended layout depicting a real location which will take up a large part of an area that requires a lot of other work before it is ready, I have built a small, simple test set of boards, on which I can at least play trains for a while, but which has also allowed me to try out new types of track work, motors and controllers, and of course make sure that new purchases get an airing to check they work as advertised, and that existing stock can be tested when I have modified them (added chips, new couplings or whatever). Ironically, even that is now in storage for a bit, due to more building work....

 

Thanks for your input Mike: really appreciated!

 

I started in the "run trains asap", but research into the prototype has moved me over to the construction side, where the journey is as important as the destination.

 

I'm excited about the implications of the Eureka! moment, which includes the ability to play trains on 2½ baseboards any time I like, and, who knows, should the urge to play trains on a larger and more consistent scale takes over, I will still be able to move the complete baseboards out to the garage.

 

But seriously, you haven't actually seen our garage .  It's a two car garage, but the car lives outside, and has done since we moved in more than 12 months ago.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

 Another thing you must not forget, is that if you have a layout (of whatever size / number of baseboards) erected and operable, is that it then will have locos and stock on it. This can rapidly reach the point that practically nothing can run and scenic work ceases because you have every inch of track occupied. Which means you need storage for the stock, and the manufacturer's boxes really don't cut it for frequent use. Just sayin'...

[Mike Storey]

 

But seriously, you haven't actually seen our garage .  It's a two car garage, but the car lives outside, and has done since we moved in more than 12 months ago.

 

I am with you there - in our last house in the UK, we had a "garage". In nearly 10 years, I don't think we managed to be able to put the car in it until the last few weeks before we put it up for sale, because I had to clear out all the junk we had kept there....However, with an incentive (ours was selling the house, but yours is far more respectable), things can change. It might seem intractable, but then, might it actually be easier than attempting the quart in a pint pot which you are otherwise facing? Do you need the help of one of those Hoarding TV programmes, like we really did, or is there something in there of far more importance than your layout, such that we could not possibly imagine?

 

I got around the problem by getting into garden railways, to keep me going. I think that is called "avoidance" by the trick cyclists.

[aardvark]

 Another thing you must not forget, is that if you have a layout (of whatever size / number of baseboards) erected and operable, is that it then will have locos and stock on it. This can rapidly reach the point that practically nothing can run and scenic work ceases because you have every inch of track occupied. Which means you need storage for the stock, and the manufacturer's boxes really don't cut it for frequent use. Just sayin'...

 

Sagely advice, 34etc, especially as my wagon stock will (mostly) come from kits.  I will add stock storage to my list of things to investigate.

 

I am with you there - in our last house in the UK, we had a "garage". In nearly 10 years, I don't think we managed to be able to put the car in it until the last few weeks before we put it up for sale, because I had to clear out all the junk we had kept there....However, with an incentive (ours was selling the house, but yours is far more respectable), things can change. It might seem intractable, but then, might it actually be easier than attempting the quart in a pint pot which you are otherwise facing? Do you need the help of one of those Hoarding TV programmes, like we really did, or is there something in there of far more importance than your layout, such that we could not possibly imagine?

 

I got around the problem by getting into garden railways, to keep me going. I think that is called "avoidance" by the trick cyclists.

 

LOL Mike.  In my case, "something ... of far more importance than your layout" would be anything belonging to the Minister for the Interior.  She tells me she's not a hoarder, as those things have a use. Umm ...

[aardvark]

Working on one or two boards at a time, and working along the layout seems like a good plan, the only risks I can see are that your skills may improve as you work along, and you might not be able to match finishes. I think I would work along with track and wiring, then go back to the start and ballast and scenic, leaving things like static grass till last, and running back along the boards in one operation, but it's down to personal preference. If a couple of boards will work a a micro so much the better, as there's nothing like having a play to renew enthusiasm.

 

Hey again Peter:

 

Just going back over your previous comments.  I do take your point about matching finishes - it is higher likely (or perhaps hopeful) that my skills will improve from zero to something above zero, but one does have to start somewhere, and perhaps it will be wisest to confine my initial attempts to a limited scope.

 

Having said that, it might be wise not to take scenic activities such as ballasting, scatter or static grass to the very edge of each baseboard, so that the line of improved skill and mismatched finish does not coincide with the baseboard join, thereby highlighting rather than camouflaging the join.

 

I am quite consigned to redoing any number of things any number of times, so perhaps I will wind up scraping back and re-doing the first baseboard after I've done the last.

 

Time will tell whether I even get to the final baseboard