How big is to big

[Andymsa]

Hi all,

 

probably a question most people think about and that is how big a layout I can build. With my current layout I’m at a crossroads in the build, the real issue is I’m trying to squeeze in too much, and have reduced things dramatically but there is still that itch of I want to get all those things in like a big marshalling yard, loco dept ect. Ideally I would like to build an extension to my existing layout build but this is not possible, so I have looked at moving and have found a few properties with potential but one in particular has caught my eye, unfortunately it’s gone to the other extreme of too big. The house itself is ok and manageable but adjoined to it is a swimming pool room 75x35 feet and snooker room 28x25 feet and a squash court 31x25 feet. Leaving aside the snooker room and squash court, is pool area to big. The idea of the of the build of the layout would be on one level with various heights, large walkways between the various base boards and peninsulars   and  to be able to walk around the edge. So the layout would be smaller than the room size. The fiddle yard would be based in the snooker room or squash court ultimately. All areas would have easy access allowing for getting older. The question I ask although very nice to have a layout this size is it too much. The issue of the pool is not the question hear and that is fairly easy to do.

[Reorte]

Too big is whatever size means you're likely to run out of enthusiasm after spending a lot of effort and it still looks like you've got very little done.

 

Also consider the operational requirements (a large, complex layout can't really be operated by one person, unless you want to go down the automation route).

 

Where that size limit is will be something only you can judge for yourself - Heaton Lodge Junction demonstrates that there appears to be no upper limit for some!

Edited May 6, 2022 by Reorte

[Andymsa]

22 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Too big is whatever size means you're likely to run out of enthusiasm after spending a lot of effort and it still looks like you've got very little done.

 

Also consider the operational requirements (a large, complex layout can't really be operated by one person, unless you want to go down the automation route).

 

Where that size limit is will be something only you can judge for yourself - Heaton Lodge Junction demonstrates that there appears to be no upper limit for some!

I should of said automation will be used 😀

[The Johnster]

I endorse the comments about operation and complextity, and the point is that a successful layout will provide you with the operational features that you want without being so complex that you stress yourself out running it.  If we assume that you want some manual operation against a backdrop of automated trains, perhaps shunting a goods or loco yard, or even at this sort of size an entire branch line from junction bay to terminus, with maybe the ability to manually override the automated main line trains to proved work for visiting operators to do would be suitable for your needs.

 

A complex automated operation such as one sometimes sees on big permanent display layouts requires permanent staff to keep up with the cleaning and maintenance requirments of large numbers of loco mechs and point motors, not to mention the electronics; complexity equals logistics, and the thing can become tail wagging a dog rathere than a pleasurable hobby!

 

It is a temptation, especially since you clearly have a sizeable disposbable income to devote to this project (if I may make some assumptions from the presence of a swimming pool and a snooker room) to build the layout you dreamed of when you had your first train set, with multiple roads, from the last page of the track plans book, a dozen or so trains running around it, high level sections, complex loops and tunnels and so forth, but I'd advise against this .  You can build a layout that looks like this, and there are plenty of examples of American layouts of this sort on Pinterest, but examination of them usually reveals that the whole complex boils down to what is essentially a single or at most double track continuous loop layout.  There may be a dozen or more trains in play, but most are held in passing loops or refuge sidings, only one or two are running at a given time.  Complex appearance but simple operation of a good variety of trains.

 

If it were me, which it won't be until I win the lottery, I'd rebuild my current BLT as a complete branch line, and operate it according to the 1955 rule book, not a method that would suit everybody, and of course Rule 1 trumps everything. 

[Nearholmer]

In the vanishingly unlikely circumstance that I suddenly had limitless disposable income, I would not create a layout bigger than the size of a double garage, because I know that would be about the limit of my capacity to build, operate (with pals) and maintain, and even that would be scenically fairly simple, as befits my love of the style of 0 gauge layouts of the 1930s and 1950s.

 

Now, I’m not recommending that limit, or excess depending upon how you look at it, to the OP, but what I am recommending is thinking hard about how much of your life you wish your model railway to take ownership of, because they can easily become all-consuming monsters if fed too much money, time, and space.

 

 

[fulton]

I found my, now gone, single garage size multi deck layout quiet enough to look after, looking at some of the American basement empires, I just think how much work it must be to look after and maintain, for me I enjoy the planning and building, not the looking after. My wife tells me off because I have that approach to our garden as well! 

[davknigh]

I was the recipient of some very sage advice from a mentor of mine over 50 years ago. It was quite simple, “don’t build anything that you are not prepared to maintain”. If the layout is a club effort with members with specialist skills that’s one thing but if you are on your own it is a different kettle of fish.

 

Cheers,

 

David

[Michael Hodgson]

Do you want to be a train driver, a signalman or the engineeering department?  A driver controls one train, and does all the shunt etc.  A signalman controls several trains at once, and his scope is limited by a geographical area which may allow several concurrent movements.  But from time to time things go wrong and engineers are needed to fix failures, etc.

 

A manually operated layout is too big if it really needs more operators than can be regularly found to act as signalmen.  Each can control one or two trains at a time, but more than that things get too hectic.

 

If the layout is automated, in theory the sky's the limit.  In practice too big still exists, because instead of driving trains, you end up fire-fighting problems - dealing with derailments brakdowns etc.  Reliability of both layout and stock governs how many you can keep on the go.

 

I know a fully semaphore signalled block-worked layout with about 100 locos and 1000 wagons, it takes over a dozen operators (signalmen) to keep perhaps 25 locos on the move simulataneously.  The problems are that (1) the owner can't attract enough competent operators these days and (2) the maintenance workload has got into such arrears that several of the stations are now all but unworkable.

 

[ClikC]

Well, In terms of mass,  building a layout north of 5.967x10^30 Kg risks creating a Black Hole. 

But in all seriousness, there are significant variables to consider:

Track to Scenery Ratio - In terms of  Surface Area of the Baseboards.
Type of Track - Set Track will be much faster to lay than setting out sweeping canted hand-built trackwork with prototypical transition curves.
Type of Scenery - Large fields and Hillsides are likely quicker than building rows and rows of terraces in a large city scene.

Type of Trains - Ready to Run, Kit Built?

Period Modelled - Availability of Kits/ Ready To Run etc. You'll probably be good modelling within living memory, but getting into early pre-grouping or areas of specialist interest, a different matter.
Talent - Where do you think your skills lay. Obviously this ignores a more curative approach where much modelling may be outsourced or directly purchased.
Level of Fidelity - Quality of the modelling aimed for overall. For instance, aiming for a fine scale approach is likely an exponent to all of the above, as a function of one's talent.

I'm sure more can add to this list.

Regards

Matt

[Harlequin]

You don't have to use the whole 75*35ft space!

 

And even if you decide to use the space you don't have to aim to fill it at the first attempt. You could do it in stages, which you complete to a level of satisfaction and then move on to the next stage. Just needs a bit of forward planning to leave room for junctions.

 

That way, if your mojo, your money or your health runs out before you fill the room you're still likely to have something that works well enough to play with.

 

Edited May 6, 2022 by Harlequin

[Andymsa]

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

You don't have to use the whole 75*35ft space!

 

And even if you decide to use the space you don't have to aim to fill it at the first attempt. You could do it in stages, which you complete to a level of satisfaction and then move on to the next stage. Just needs a bit of forward planning to leave room for junctions.

 

That way, if your mojo, your money or your health runs out before you fill the room you're still likely to have something that works well enough to play with.

 

as to the space 75x35 being proposed, with my existing layout the walkways are less than ideal but are reasonable. So no the whole of the room size would not be used as I want reasonable sized walkways. The idea is I’m going for longer plain track runs between stations with more realistic changes in terrain and to give trains a good run also. Your idea of a staged build was exactly what I was thinking, this was based on my previous experience on my current layout that 5 years elapsed before the first trains ran. Very similar to a previous reply I do get more enjoyment from the build process but I do want just sit a watch trains run by and decide on what level of intervention based on mood. One comment I noticed was referring how much I want this to take over, as I took early retirement I can commit as much time as I want or not, it’s certainly not uncommon for me to spend an 8 hours or more working on a layout.

[Harlequin]

7 minutes ago, Andymsa said:

as to the space 75x35 being proposed, with my existing layout the walkways are less than ideal but are reasonable. So no the whole of the room size would not be used as I want reasonable sized walkways. The idea is I’m going for longer plain track runs between stations with more realistic changes in terrain and to give trains a good run also. Your idea of a staged build was exactly what I was thinking, this was based on my previous experience on my current layout that 5 years elapsed before the first trains ran. Very similar to a previous reply I do get more enjoyment from the build process but I do want just sit a watch trains run by and decide on what level of intervention based on mood. One comment I noticed was referring how much I want this to take over, as I took early retirement I can commit as much time as I want or not, it’s certainly not uncommon for me to spend an 8 hours or more working on a layout.

 

You are living the dream, Andy! 😃

 

[Matt]

Wow I want to see this one develop. I’m a big layout person myself - there’s something about full length trains in the landscape for me. I would go for it but in stages as discussed. And I thought my 45ft by 10 ft was big…

 

if I had more space I would have long sections of single track in spectacular scenery representing WHL, as well as some of the busier areas around Glasgow I already model.
 

With that sort of space I presume you’re not talking n gauge…?

[Nearholmer]

27 minutes ago, Andymsa said:

it’s certainly not uncommon for me to spend an 8 hours or more working on a layout.

If that’s “your thing”, and you enjoy doing it for multiple days (months/years), then I can understand how a whopper layout might be for you. 
 

I too took early retirement, and can happily do one thing for hours on end, days on end, when I get the chance, but that one thing is cycling. Much as I love my toy trains, they tend to be more an “if wet, in the church hall” and social thing.

[Andymsa]

The dilemma for me is as the property I would love to buy is vast in the additional space available, although the house is fairly modest there is still a maintenance aspect to this and time available for the build, one other possibility is to build my own similar sized structure with less time consuming property to maintain. The other issue the pool would require filling in, which is not difficult but would require a vast amount of hardcore and time. But also this is very much dependent on me getting the property at the price I want. The reason I posed the question was to see if this idea was practically possible 

[Matt]

I’ve no idea what sort of buildings you’re talking about (age, build etc) but having recently built a place to modern eco standards I can highly recommend. We are fully electric heat pump and built to passive house standards with mechanical ventilation heat recovery. My purpose built hobby room has north facing roof lights. Now this is where the relevance starts - building in this way I have a hobby space which temperature varies by only around 1 deg all year round and humidity is controlled. Such an environment reduces the amount maintenance needed which could be critical on a mammoth build, as well as creating a pleasant environment in which to spend time. I know nothing about the buildings you’re referring to but wonder if starting with a clean slate could deliver a better hobby space?  

[Andymsa]

9 hours ago, Matt said:

I’ve no idea what sort of buildings you’re talking about (age, build etc) but having recently built a place to modern eco standards I can highly recommend. We are fully electric heat pump and built to passive house standards with mechanical ventilation heat recovery. My purpose built hobby room has north facing roof lights. Now this is where the relevance starts - building in this way I have a hobby space which temperature varies by only around 1 deg all year round and humidity is controlled. Such an environment reduces the amount maintenance needed which could be critical on a mammoth build, as well as creating a pleasant environment in which to spend time. I know nothing about the buildings you’re referring to but wonder if starting with a clean slate could deliver a better hobby space?  

yes this is something I have considered and was my first choice with my existing setup, but I wasn’t able to obtain the extra land I needed, I also have been looking for property with enough land as well but have not found anything that ticks all the boxes yet. My existing setup has air conditioning and I would do the same again there. 

[RobinofLoxley]

Andy you have got all the modelling skills, as far as I can see. On your previous layout, judging from the photos, you elected for the open structure build method, which, skilled or not, is more time consuming to do, I judge without the requisite knowledge. If you build some flat sections on baseboards to start with, you might get something operational within a reasonable time frame. You can get boards built then, and just assemble. Plan for a section with really challenging build concepts for the 'second half'.

 

As far as the space is concerned, the perimeter is 75 meters give or take. Obviously you are going to cross the interior space at different heights and angles but you can leave a proportional amount empty - this is where you overdid it before I think - leave space to admire your handiwork. If you cant do that in the space available this time, there's no hope!!

[Andymsa]

1 hour ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Andy you have got all the modelling skills, as far as I can see. On your previous layout, judging from the photos, you elected for the open structure build method, which, skilled or not, is more time consuming to do, I judge without the requisite knowledge. If you build some flat sections on baseboards to start with, you might get something operational within a reasonable time frame. You can get boards built then, and just assemble. Plan for a section with really challenging build concepts for the 'second half'.

 

As far as the space is concerned, the perimeter is 75 meters give or take. Obviously you are going to cross the interior space at different heights and angles but you can leave a proportional amount empty - this is where you overdid it before I think - leave space to admire your handiwork. If you cant do that in the space available this time, there's no hope!!

hi robin, I don’t believe the open frame method takes any more time to do than a flat baseboard method. You just have to think more about where things will go. 

[AyJay]

Hi Andy, a thought that I have been mulling over, should I ever decide to build another is this:

build all the track on an elevated track bed, with all the off-track areas built onto easily detachable cassettes that just slot into place. That way, you are able to start running something early in the project and all your scenically can be done off-layout, so the track is not contaminated by mess and you are working in comfort, not getting a sore back leaning across the layout. Just a thought.

[WIMorrison]

Andy

 

I do not doubt your skills or ability to build a layout within the potential space - though I am insanely jealous of both the ambition to fill such a space, and the ability to finance an operation of this scale 😀

 

The only bits of advice I would throw into the mix are that you need to consider how long it will take to get a reasonable amount running, including the programming required - we both know that this can take not inconsiderable effort when a simple logic issue evade discovery. I know that I like to have some early wins and looking at a 5 year (or more) plan to get everything running would be depressing for me, I would want to see something inside a few months at most 😉.

 

The second (and final) bit of advice is that you should find someone local to your new property that shares a similar interest that you can mull things over with, someone that can pick you up when things go wrong (as they surely will at some point), someone that can look with a different set or eyes and perhaps suggest alternative solutions to improve the vision - but mostly is just someone to share some banter with when building this epic.

 

Iain

[Andymsa]

An update,

 

unfortunately I have decided to pass on the purchase of the vast space, this was not for anything with regard to the layout build itself. But more to with overall value of the property in general, as much as I would of loved the concept of the project sometimes you have to take a hard look at the overall aspect of the purchase of the new property. So the search continues.

[RobinofLoxley]

Maybe not unfortunately Andy.

[The Johnster]

Indeed, maybe not.  There is a beneficial discipline on layout planning that fails to be imposed by having an excess of space; a squiz on Pinterest will show you any number of examples of American detached house footprint basement which repeat the same sort of theme, not very well IMHO, a single track main line running through the Rockies between passing loops and serving small industries along the way.  This is, in itself, a perfectly cromulent layout scenario, but the standard US interpretation of it involves crowding the space with peninsular baseboards and the use of unfeasibly sharp curvature, and looping to provide multiple levels with an overprovision of trestle bridges.  A mountainside might go from floor to ceiling and the track passes across a scene at 4 or 5 different levels. 

 

The reality of mountain pass railroads is that they are built through challenging terrain and while loops occur, they are rare.  Population density is low and the railroad connects cities miles away either side of the mountains; only one road is usually visible, usually down close to the riverbed.  It can be done very effectively, but too many modellers crowd the space to try to impress, whether themselves or visitors is not clear.  Operation of what usually boils down to a single track continuous circuit with trains stored on staging roads, which is what they call a fiddle yard, is usually well within a single operator's capacity.

 

The advantage of a big space is that, with discipline providing a framework within which you can be completely creative, one can model a real or fictional location to scale.  'Little Bytham' and 'Leamington Spa are classic examples of what can be done in this way; 14 coach expresses running at scale speeds that take more than a few seconds to pass through the space between the fy entrances, and recent layouts very long run stretches of main line, like 'Horfield' or the WCML layout exhibited in Chester Cathederal are extreme examples; you see a train in the distance, after a while it passes you, and then you watch it disappear into the other distance, a very realistic impression of watching real trains on a main line out in the country.

[AyJay]

Another thought has come to mind with regards large layouts, although also applicable to normal domestic sized layouts. Last w/e I went to visit a good friend and see his layout under construction; must be 20ft long by 10ft wide, constructed of thick ply on softwood battens, in one piece and filling the top floor of a townhouse. There are all sorts of reasons why you have to move a layout. I would limit the largest side to 1m (or a diagonal of 1.2m) and watch the weight, because if you cannot carry it around the house, through doors and down stairs, unaided, then it’s too big.