Best room shape?

[Charlton Halt]

Hi All,

 

I've been lurking on this forum for a few months now and appreciate the vast amount of knowledge and advice contained herein, but this is my first post so please go easy

 

It's been a while since I've dabbled with railway modelling, partly due to life commitments and partly due to lack of space. I'm now in the fortunate position of having more time on my hands and plenty of space in the garden, so I'm planning to build a nice insulated room to house a decent size layout.

 

As I'm in England I'll need to get building regulations approval for anything over 30m2, and that's one expense I'd rather avoid (apart from Part P for the electrics, which there's no way around). Within that limit I've got the ground to accommodate any shape room and still satisfy the demands of permitted development. My dilemma is whether to go for something fairly square (6m x 5m) or something long and thin (10m x 3m).

 

My experience, such as it is, is with OO gauge. I was put off N gauge after an unsuccessful foray many moons ago. No doubt things have moved on considerably since then, but my eyesight and dexterity have both moved in the opposite direction, so I think I'll stick with what I know.

 

I have a small spare room in the house for working on the modelling side of things, and I can use the garage for the more industrial stuff such as cutting baseboards to size. The new room will be dedicated to the layout and maybe some storage.

 

It strikes me that length is usually the problem when trying to achieve anything remotely prototypical, and that suggests long and thin with the door at one end. I could run a 1m baseboard along both long walls and the far end and have clear runs of 7m to 8m, allowing for sweeping bends. If I wanted a roundy, roundy I could always add a removable bridge across the doorway.

 

On the other hand, with 6m x 5m there would be room for a sizeable island which could accommodate a terminus.

 

I've attached a drawing of both extremes.

 

Either way I'd probably hide the fiddle yard below the baseboard on the basis that there's enough length for a 1:50 gradient, or incorporate it within the layout as a marshalling yard. But that's a decision for another day.

 

I'm most interested in modelling the post-war, pre-Beeching era so I can legitimately run steam alongside early diesel.

 

I'm under no illusion that actually designing and building a large layout is a mammoth task likely to take several years, not to mention a fair few quid. That said, I can always build a small layout in a large room if it all gets too much, but I can't build a large layout in a small room. Any space I don't use will always be useful for something.

 

So, if it were you, would it be:

 

1) 10m x 3m, or
2) 6m x 5m, or
3) something else?

[Stubby47]

It might sound silly, but have you considered a circular room ?  That way the track will always be curved, but generously rather than quite tight as would be on your two plans.

 

30m2 = diameter of about 6m (18ft) so you'd still have room to have an island terminus if required.

 

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Stubby47

[Kris]

I love Stubby's idea of a round room but would hate to build it. Personally I would go for a compromise size of 7.5 x 4. A 1m gap in the middle will feel quite small, yet a 2m one will feel spacious.  

[njee20]

Yeah I'd hate to build a round room, or a layout to go in it frankly!

 

Of the two I'd go long and thin. For me the island terminus plan isn't really that workable, but that depends if you want a big terminus! Kris's suggestion may have merit though, if your control panel protrudes into your 1m 'aisle' space then you erode that quite quickly too.

[Stubby47]

It could be octagonal - it was just an alternative to the usual shapes

[Duncan.]

Look at the prototype, it is long and thin, the prototype provides the answer.

Cheers

 

[Philou]

I've gone for a central island, but as a one-ended fiddle yard. I do have a little more space to play with (7.5m x 6.5m) but when I put my plan up on RMweb, the island seemed to find favour.

 

By the way, welcome to the RMweb collective.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[03060]

For a good example of a large rectangular purpose built garden shed housing a large 00 layout look up Mike Edge's Wentworth Junction thread on here, this might help you to visualise both the type of shed and realistically what you may be able to fit in it. As you have a blank canvas at the moment it might help you decide whether this is going to be right for you. Mike is very amiable chap (and a very experienced professional modeller) whom I'm sure would offer some practical advice if you PM'd him.

 

Good luck with the venture.

Regards,

Ian.

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Personally, I'd work backwards from a track plan.

 

Mike.

[gordon s]

My own room is around 5.4m square, but as it is a converted loft area of a double garage, the slope of the roof narrows down two sides of the square to around 4.2m. I have a minimum radius of 3' and it's surprising just how much space the track gobbles up. A through station with platforms long enough to cope with seven coaches and curves each end quickly fills the 5.4m length. Had I realised that at the outset, I would have considered an alternative location in the house.

 

If I were starting again, I'd go for a longer space every time. 

Edited June 3, 2020 by gordon s

[Pete the Elaner]

15 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Personally, I'd work backwards from a track plan.

 

 

So would I.

 

Most of us are restricted by room shape when planning our layouts. By thinking before you build the room, you have partially freed yourself of this restriction.

Have you got any idea of what you want to build, or what features you want to include?

[fezza]

I'd add that why not look at multi level layouts  before deciding on a track planor building shape? Tony Koesters book on this is well worth the cash. Its the best way to increase your mainline run if operations are a priority. 

 

The ideal room is toplit through the roof with no side windows. 

 

Before building a major project I build it in Trainz software. That tells me if the track plan works and is operationally interesting. I then draw the track plan. That's the time to decide on room size. 

[The Johnster]

My advice would be, irrespective of the size of the room, to not crowd it with track.  If you are going to be operating alone most of the time, there is a limit to how much you can actually do at once and you don't want maintenance to take over from operating to a greater extent than it has to.  You seem wedded to the continuous circuit idea, which suggests that watching the trains running through the scenery is important to you, but I would leave options open for operating, shunting in the sense of making up and breaking down trains, freight especially, separate from the main line.  I find the idea of working a goods yard or marshalling yard while the main line traffic runs in the background very attractive.

 

To take the two schemas you have provided, the long thin features metre width boards, which you will find awkward to reach the back of; 60cm/2' are the go to size unless you can get at both sides of the boards.  Conversely, a metre is not a huge amount of room to walk around in and you may find it a bit cramped and claustrophobic, especially when more than one person gets in there and even more so if they are ladies or gentlemen 'of a certain carriage.  

 

The other plan has even tighter spaces in the operating wells between the wall boards and the peninsula, and my suggested narrower wall boards will be even more useful here.  The 3m peninsula is not all that long if you are thinking in terms of 12 coach expresses, and the necessary tight curves for the triangular junction may prove restrictive, as may the double track junctions.  

 

So, in answer to your question, something else; a shape midway between the two footprints, with a continuous circuit featuring a through station on the end away from the door, and 60cm wide boards,  The station end is a 180 degree curve of as large a radius as you can manage and the platforms curve with the track.  One of the long sides will have the goods yard, and any carriage sidings or loco depot, and maybe a branch line disappearing off scene and a private industry or two to be served.  On the other side, I'd come straight off the station into a fiddle yard to store the trains, to the full width of the boards.  This will probably be about 4m long, and you'll be able to get 10 or so roads in leaving enough space between them for you to be able to lift stock out when you have to.  

 

Come out of your fiddle yard to a stretch of plain double track main line in open country, gently curving, and eventually leading to what will probably be a bridge to disguise the lifting section at the door.  The door should open outwards or be a slider mounted on the outside of the building.  As you come off the bridge, you begin to enter the complex of loops and sidings approaching the station.  The layout is basically an up and down main line in a continuous loop, and the fiddle yard enables you to show a train in either direction appearing, stopping or not somewhere in the station complex, or returning to the fy.  At this point you can have done with it for now, or let it run until you want something else.  Tbh, this will be as much as you can comfortably manage on your own

 

The period you've chosen, the steam/diesel changeover, is very popular and well supported by the trade, and allows for a wide variety of stock; hope you've got deep pockets.  I'd consider a workshop on the fy side of the layout, handy for dealing with any problems that arise in operation, as well as or instead of your box room serious modelling workshop.  Don't stint on ventilation, insulation, or heating; as well as your own comfort you need to keep the temperature variation within as tight limits as you can manage, because track expands and contracts; many years ago I had a loft layout that ripped itself to bits eventually.

 

Welcome back to the insanity, I mean hobby, and welcome to RMweb!

Edited June 3, 2020 by The Johnster

[TheQ]

I'd agree with not crowding things with track.

 

I'd have a look at what you'd like to build as a layout first. Does it lend itself to roundy or end to end? Is / Are the planned station/s fat or thin?

 

Since my home layout is mostly a Y shaped junction, my shed is long but has a side extension at one end to allow for the Y..

One station on it is  to scale, no compression, 18 Ft long but 18inches wide , But the Y junction Station is, to Scale, 16ft Wide...

[JDW]

Some good advice above, I'd go for long and thin rather than short and square, as that leaves two long sides for "features" (stations, etc) whereas square means four shorter bits with curves, and potentially having to build features like a station on a curve. Although that can look good, for me I model modern image and thus quite long vehicles which overhang on a curve, and having platforms on a curve exaggerates the sharpness of the curve even more. For an earlier layour, using short wheelbase coaches the effect is less noticeable so I'd be more amenable to square. Likewise modern freight stock tends to be long wagins in long rakes, making it hard to fit a "small" goods yard inside the arc of the curves. On the other hand, a traditional goods yard with shed, coal staithes, etc, could conceivably fit at the front of a squarer layout in front of an arc of main line as it sweeps around behind.

I'd definitely want the main part of the layout narrower than 1m though, I'd go for 2'6 at most, as trying to reach to the back becomes quite difficult otherwise. Of course, you can always vary the width and make it a bit wider in places to fit in certain features.

[Charlton Halt]

Hi All,

 

Thanks for all your replies and encouragement so far.

 

I like Stubby47's idea of a round room, though I'd make it octagonal for simplicity. It certainly solves the problem of tight curves and still leaves room for a peninsular, if only for the control panel. If I come up with a layout I'm happy with I might see if I can't curve it to fit without looking odd.

 

That said, it appears that long and thin is winning out over something more square.

 

My choice of 1m baseboards was based on a stretch test across the breakfast island in the kitchen. I figured a wider board would allow more depth to the scene, and I could probably manage to place pre-built scenery at that sort of distance. I definitely couldn't do anything that required precision though, and the tracks would need to be closer to the front edge. But I'm more than happy to defer to experience and reduce the width.

 

I quite like the idea of a continuous run mainline with a branch line and goods yard / loco depot for the more interesting traffic manoeuvres. Outside of the fiddle yard / marshalling yard I wasn't planning to spray the room with track. I'd much rather it looked vaguely realistic than there was movement going on everywhere.

 

I have a copy of AnyRail and a few possible locations in mind, so I'll have a go at a track plan using 60cm to 75cm baseboards and see how I get on. I can see it makes sense to design the layout before building the room. No doubt I'll be back with more questions before long.

Edited June 4, 2020 by Charlton Halt
fix typo

[JDW]

Adding to what I said earlier, remember that however wide the board is, in the corners it will be an even longer reach. In one place I have to stretch around 4ft to reach the very corner. Not something I need to do often of course, once it's built that's pretty much it, but it's not easy. Try repeating stretching over your breakfast counter wearing a shirt with baggy sleeves over the top of a row of houses with chimney pots and TV aeriels on the roof. Having scenery at the back that is higher up will make it easier to reach of course.

[lmsforever]

Long and narrow  good for creating a railway through the landscape dont be tempted by lots of track or buildings.This will work for solo oeraration  a fiddle yard down part of one side with storage roads for locos and stock not required above ,and underneath lenty of cupboards.You could model any region with much fun with the scenery etc  ,good luck with this.

[Nearholmer]

I’d vote long and thin, but probably not put the door in the end, maybe part way down one side, partly to allow freer design at the end, partly to reduce the emergency escape distance.

 

Also, think about your pals when designing the ‘people space’: are they all racing snakes who could pass without embarrassment in a drain pipe? If not, watch your aisle width.

 

Overall, perhaps slightly less long, and slightly less thin, but not a larger area overall, because I think you are at the top end of what will be maintainable as a one person effort.

 

What about designing the layout to allow for both solo and two-person operation? It’s more fun with a friend.

 

 

Edited June 3, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Matt]

I've had layouts in rooms similar to what you describe:

Previous layout room was 6m x 8m whilst current layout room is 3.3m x 15m.  Both rooms were purpose built.

 

I would have to say that i'm not sure which I prefer - for sure the long thin room allows a more prototypical layout to be built "on the straight" but TBH the room is a bit too long and you struggle to see the layout from one of the room to the other.  The old layout room (scenic section) ran round 2 walls and had a very gentle curve between the two walls and the main scenic run ended up being not much shorter than the new setup.  It had the advantage of creating more of an amphitheatre feel for viewing the trains.  Overall in both cases I built around the walls in a roundy-roundy with fiddle yard on other side(s) and I have wasted less overall space with the long thin room.  If I were doing it again though i'm not sure which way I would go next time.

 

M 

[Enterprisingwestern]

12 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

It’s more fun with a friend.

 

 

As are quite a few things!

 

Mike.