The greatest layouts you never built (and perhaps now never will!)

[HonestTom]

2 hours ago, SD85 said:

 

Didn't Iain Rice plan something like this in one of his books - I think it was the Urban Layout Designs one.

Thanks for the tip - I shall have to see what I can find. It could probably work as a micro-layout. I've always found the prototype interesting, it's not far from where I live and generally it's just an itch I want to scratch.

[PaulRhB]

Ok a bit of devils advocate here, have people thought about the implications of ‘I’d love to model that’ :) 

There seems to be a lot of wishlisting rather than actually thought about layout design going on ;) 

Many of these ideas would require lottery winning amounts of money not just a big project we thought we’d manage one day. 
 

Are our grand ideas actually practical model ideas?

So what is it that makes you want to model a certain idea? The scene or scenes, the trains themselves or the operation of the real railway?
One aspect of layout design should be how it’s going to operate, like the real thing or an illusion of it. You could model Waterloo but how would you actually control it with that amount of trains moving in a confined area at once? DCC allows the multiple trains but how do you control the routes and drivers see the signals for something that complex? In cab cameras are one way and a virtual panel to control it or do you set it up as an automated sequence? Is it even practical to get enough people together to drive the trains individually on such a layout? Several large layouts such as the McKinley railway rely on the computer to run the main trains with the operators becoming station pilots or yard shunters effectively. Manpower has to be a consideration because one train running at Waterloo doesn’t look like the real thing ;) 

If you model multiple stations how long does the run need to be minimum between stations? We manage with a few feet on US and 009 modules as the speeds are low and trains fairly short but what do you require for the Flying Scotsman or Atlantic Coast Express at full speed to get a run in? On my HOm I settled at 12ft as the trains were about 3ft long and moved at around 30-40 scale mph. 

 

[t-b-g]

39 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

Ok a bit of devils advocate here, have people thought about the implications of ‘I’d love to model that’ :) 

There seems to be a lot of wishlisting rather than actually thought about layout design going on ;) 

Many of these ideas would require lottery winning amounts of money not just a big project we thought we’d manage one day. 
 

Are our grand ideas actually practical model ideas?

So what is it that makes you want to model a certain idea? The scene or scenes, the trains themselves or the operation of the real railway?
One aspect of layout design should be how it’s going to operate, like the real thing or an illusion of it. You could model Waterloo but how would you actually control it with that amount of trains moving in a confined area at once? DCC allows the multiple trains but how do you control the routes and drivers see the signals for something that complex? In cab cameras are one way and a virtual panel to control it or do you set it up as an automated sequence? Is it even practical to get enough people together to drive the trains individually on such a layout? Several large layouts such as the McKinley railway rely on the computer to run the main trains with the operators becoming station pilots or yard shunters effectively. Manpower has to be a consideration because one train running at Waterloo doesn’t look like the real thing ;) 

If you model multiple stations how long does the run need to be minimum between stations? We manage with a few feet on US and 009 modules as the speeds are low and trains fairly short but what do you require for the Flying Scotsman or Atlantic Coast Express at full speed to get a run in? On my HOm I settled at 12ft as the trains were about 3ft long and moved at around 30-40 scale mph. 

 

 

Interesting thoughts. I have often considered that there is a maximum size for a layout and that beyond that size, you either end up with something that you cannot see properly or is so big and complicated that just looking after general maintenance becomes an overpowering chore.

 

I am not a particular fan of long trains on layouts. When viewing the real railway, if you were standing by the lineside or at a station, you could rarely see the whole of a long train at one time and if you could see it, your eyes were fixed on one part of it (usually the loco) and the rest was not observed in any great detail.

 

I once read an article (I wish I could remember who wrote it) that pointed out that if you stand at a normal viewing distance from a model railway, your eyes can take in about a 4ft long scene at any one time. The article was quite right. Ever since then, I have designed my layouts as a series of 4ft long "segments" and tried to make each 4ft section not the same as the ones either side.

 

So with my interests in the pre-grouping scene, a loco and 5 short bogie carriages makes a realistic and accurate full length express but is only just over 4ft long. It pleases my eyes to see such a train far more than it does to see something 12 carriages long. Such trains work much better in something like 2mm scale, where you are, in effect, further away and can take more in with your 4ft field of vision.

 

Unless you have multiple operators, or you have a simple "roundy roundy" (which usually bore me silly) then running more than one train at once is tricky and I would rather have one train that I can operate in an interesting way than any number of computer controlled trains whizzing about.

 

One type of layout that is rarely built but which I would love to have is something like the late Richard Chown's "Castle Rackrent". A series of fairly simple stations, each of which could be perhaps taken to an exhibition as a stand alone layout, yet which connect together to form a whole line, which goes from one place to another via various stations and facilities. Operating then becomes a social event, with friends coming round for a session.

 

Buckingham is a bit like that (I have had two friends round today to run the layout) but if I have any modelling ambitions left, it would be to build something like that myself.   

 

  

[Michael Edge]

38 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

Interesting thoughts. I have often considered that there is a maximum size for a layout and that beyond that size, you either end up with something that you cannot see properly or is so big and complicated that just looking after general maintenance becomes an overpowering chore.

 

I am not a particular fan of long trains on layouts. When viewing the real railway, if you were standing by the lineside or at a station, you could rarely see the whole of a long train at one time and if you could see it, your eyes were fixed on one part of it (usually the loco) and the rest was not observed in any great detail.

 

I once read an article (I wish I could remember who wrote it) that pointed out that if you stand at a normal viewing distance from a model railway, your eyes can take in about a 4ft long scene at any one time. The article was quite right. Ever since then, I have designed my layouts as a series of 4ft long "segments" and tried to make each 4ft section not the same as the ones either side.

 

So with my interests in the pre-grouping scene, a loco and 5 short bogie carriages makes a realistic and accurate full length express but is only just over 4ft long. It pleases my eyes to see such a train far more than it does to see something 12 carriages long. Such trains work much better in something like 2mm scale, where you are, in effect, further away and can take more in with your 4ft field of vision.

 

Unless you have multiple operators, or you have a simple "roundy roundy" (which usually bore me silly) then running more than one train at once is tricky and I would rather have one train that I can operate in an interesting way than any number of computer controlled trains whizzing about.

 

One type of layout that is rarely built but which I would love to have is something like the late Richard Chown's "Castle Rackrent". A series of fairly simple stations, each of which could be perhaps taken to an exhibition as a stand alone layout, yet which connect together to form a whole line, which goes from one place to another via various stations and facilities. Operating then becomes a social event, with friends coming round for a session.

 

Buckingham is a bit like that (I have had two friends round today to run the layout) but if I have any modelling ambitions left, it would be to build something like that myself.   

 

  

Cwmafon is a bit like that, separate scenes around the railway linked by hidden sections of one sort or another. 

For myself I'm restricted by available space to build it in but I do like long trains and the 60 wagon double empty train on Wentworth Junction does look good rolling past. When I got roped in to build Carlisle I did think it might be a step too far at 30m x 6m but it is actually nearly finished now, there is a lot of maintenance work involved though. There are other problems with such a vast layout as well, the baseboards are more than 8ft wide in some places and we've come to the conclusion that we can't really do the station roof. It would be 7ft long and about 3ft wide even in it's present form, it would also obscure much of the view of the trains - one of the drawbacks of choosing a location normally seen from the inside (on the platforms) rather than from the outside as in our models. There is also a huge cost in this sort of project, not to mention the 11 years or so it has taken so far.

[PaulRhB]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

I once read an article (I wish I could remember who wrote it) that pointed out that if you stand at a normal viewing distance from a model railway, your eyes can take in about a 4ft long scene at any one time.

Iain Rice and many in the US call theses LDE’s or layout design elements but they are basically cameo scenes with the framing done by the wider layout. Heaton Lodge opened up the long view to an extreme if you stood at one end but was still fairly conventional in depth albeit very deep compared to most layouts. 
 

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

then running more than one train at once is tricky and I would rather have one train that I can operate in an interesting way than any number of computer controlled trains whizzing about

Although the computer can add that bustling backdrop if you are into the programming and don’t have a pool of operators every time you run. Operating sessions are a thing in the US where larger layouts are more common and people travel some fairly large distances to operate others layouts. We sort of do this with Freemo and Freem009 too by hiring a hall and meeting up and I guess it applies to several larger show layouts too. 
 

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

One type of layout that is rarely built but which I would love to have is something like the late Richard Chown's "Castle Rackrent". A series of fairly simple stations, each of which could be perhaps taken to an exhibition as a stand alone layout, yet which connect together to form a whole line, which goes from one place to another via various stations and facilities.

We do this with Freemo and it has the advantage of fitting in various shape halls  

 

We tried it with ‘Brit mod’ but it didn’t take off. 
We are doing it with Freem009 too and even went as far as to change the layout round for the second day of a show just because we could! 

 

ok we only swapped a few boards round but it gave a different feel as the loco and carriage sheds moved. 

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

there is a lot of maintenance work involved though. There are other problems with such a vast layout as well, the baseboards are more than 8ft wide in some places

 

Yes access to clean track and dust is a major issue let alone maintenance or building it unless you can have access hatches or pull boards out like Iain Rice’s jigsaw approach to scenic modules. 
 

14 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

one of the drawbacks of choosing a location normally seen from the inside (on the platforms) rather than from the outside as in our models.

Agreed and changing the viewpoint can reveal quite a few challenges. There’s that excellent major station on the show circuit, Lime Street, but the places to see inside are very limited by the roof girders so the crowd tends to bunch and it gets frustrating to watch when a few hog the prime spots for a long time. As a result I’ve admired it as a model before a show opens but not actually managed to see it operate properly! 

[TheQ]

Another odd one I seriously considered was " IF"

No nothing to do with the film,.

 But "IF" Broad Gauge had won the gauge wars.

Probably a preserved railway, but carriages and well known locomotives to Broad Gauge.

So an A4 would be comparatively  simple, remove the walscherts gear, widen the loco and you're there.

A broad gauge Deltic. Again simple to do.

Some of the smaller locos would be more odd, and need more careful modification as the "chassis" would be broad gauge, but the boiler need not be any larger..

Carriages and wagons would be easy, just widen it.. a 10ft wide mark one carriage anyone?.

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2023 by TheQ

[Pacific231G]

On 31/12/2022 at 10:08, TomJ said:

 

1) Oxford Riverside. The university forced the GWR station to be even further out. By the turn on the century it was getting crowded - and the Met were planning on their own line much closer to the city centre. So to kill two birds with one stone the GWR built a new station on a short branch closer into the city by the river to take the local and London traffic. A cramped Minories style terminus, inspired by Birmingham Moor Street

 

 

Tom. You're a lot closer to reality than you are possibly aware.

That really WAS the first railway station in Oxford. From 1844 it was the terminus, at Grandpont just to the west of Folly Bridge, of a ten mile branch from Didcot. It was slightly closer to Carfax (the central crossroads in Oxford) than the current Oxford Station and quite a lot closer than the planned Met. terminus in St. Clements just the the other side of Magdalen Bridge.

There's far more about it here

https://southoxfordhistory.org.uk/interesting-aspects-of-grandpont-and-south-oxford-s-history/the-coming-of-the-railway-to-oxford

It closed to passengers in 1852 (so was always broad gauge) when the GWR opened its new station by the Botlley road next to the LNWR terminus. It continued as a goods station until 1872 and was then demolished and the area  developed for housing. Some of the earthworks near Millstream Junction can still though be seen.

However, had the university or the local topography forced the GWR to build its line to Birmingham further west closer to or at Botley (where the A34 now runs as a bypass) ,  Grandpont might well have remained as Oxford's main station and, one assumes with a triangular junction,  would have been an interesting terminus branched off the through main line rather like  Tours or Orleans  still are and Biarritz and Boulogne used to be. I can see the London-Oxford trains terminating there and the through expresses either reversing there with a loco change or with a shuttle train running from Oxford (Grandpont) to Oxford (Botley Road) or possibly just Botley junction as happens at Tours with St. Pierre-les-Corps on the Paris-Bordeaux main line. 

With Grandpont, Rewley Road and St. Clements, the city of dreaming spires (and car factory chimneys) might well have had a far more interesting set of stations than the rather run down Oxford Station where I used to watch the steam locos (but NEVER to write down their numbers) I mustn't be too rude about it though as I made my first ever "scripted" film there (with the stationmaster's permission) a very sub Tati silent sketch about a man waiting for ages for a train and finally missing it. 

Edited January 10, 2023 by Pacific231G
inclusion of dates

[Keith Addenbrooke]

A fascinating thought-thread, thank you @Captain Kernow.

 

Over the years I must have doodled hundreds thousands of schemes, and while those in the public domain are for Micro-Layouts on Carl Arendt’s website, many of the ideas I had when younger would definitely fit the definition of the OP here for “greatest layouts.”

 

One that springs to mind was for Birmingham New Street (in N).  I grew up mainly in the West Midlands, and my Dad - who worked in public transport - had a copy of the 70s layout of New Street on some lining paper.  I spent many hours simplifying the twelve platform behemoth, and Don Jones’ (?) part-garden railway OO version was featured in Railway Modeller as inspiration too around this time, so it could be done.

 

4 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

One aspect of layout design should be how it’s going to operate, like the real thing or an illusion of it…

 

I actually thought of that: I went for “illusion” and got as far as a six platform design for half the station - to be operated like a terminus.  As I only had a small amount of rolling stock and limited space, the plan was for the station and fiddle yard to operate in reverse: most of the stock would be stored in the station platforms, and trains would depart in twos to a small fiddle yard - returning soon after.  This was the BR blue period, so variety in rolling stock was not a factor I needed to worry about.

 

Another idea I had was for an additional Birmingham - London line, which I remember adding to my fold-out BR Network Map.  I based my London Terminus on Marylebone (as it was then), but the only suitable space I could see in my AtoZ of the Capital was somewhere called St James’ Park, so that’s where I plonked it!

 

Each month I would also drool over the latest basement empire featured in Model Railroader magazine, with Bruce Chubb’s original Sunset Valley RR my favourite.  That, and just about every plan in Linn Westcott’s 101 Track Plans.

 

I was also rather taken with some grand schemes I had in a Faller Plan Book of mainly German railways.  These were for very large table tops. 

 

Looking back, I guess I never imagined I wouldn’t one day build a big layout, but even if I were to have the space and budget now, I’ve since learned I don’t much enjoy track laying, and I know I would choose to use a larger space for a simpler layout where I can sit back and watch trains run instead anyway.

 

But if I hadn’t had those dreams, there’s every chance I would have lost interest in the hobby long ago, so maybe they served their purpose in a different way, Keith.

 

Edited January 10, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke

[PaulRhB]

As a friend on here discovered having the space for a dream layout only means you end up having to decide which one!

We mused a large HOm layout

 

Or another one we considered about thirty years ago was at another friend’s in an old converted chicken shed, the choices were US HO, German HO that got built or a condensed West Highland line. 

The original drawing is lost but I made up this schematic a few years ago from the pencil doodles. 

We even had a G scale RhB idea for the space based around another friend building this station and we thought what if we extend it . . .

 

[Philou]

6 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

There seems to be a lot of wishlisting rather than actually thought about layout design going on

 

Been there, doing that.

 

I'm going to try and reply to the points you've raised - but purely from my own perspective and therefore YMMV.

 

In a long and distant past and long before decimalisation became a thing, I did have the benefit of the attic in my parents' Victorian house - actually I just shanghai'd it. It was dark and uninsulated and the flooring joists weren't - they were ceiling joists - and there was no electricity. But joy, the useable space to create a layout was 27' 1" x 7' 6". I was hooked! This was around 1964-5. I had no woodwork knowledge, no carpentry skills and no electrickery ideas. But it happened, the room was boarded out, electricty laid (to the then P, N and earth, red, black and green cable) and a 3" x 1" frame erected topped with fibre insulation board - all done by yours truly. What drove me to do this? A plan by CJ Freezer in his Larger Layout Plans book - Retford was on the front cover. But I knew nothing of Ian Rice, Peter Denny et al (and to be honest I still don't - just what I pick up on here) - it was CJF for me. Go forward a few years - do miserably at GCE 'O's and 'A's due to my interest in my modelling and then discover fast women and slow cars and modelling fell by the way-side, though my father continued the use of my layout - so it wasn't wasted.

 

6 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Many of these ideas would require lottery winning amounts of money not just a big project we thought we’d manage one day.

 

Not necessarily so. Fast forward to 2012 and I was finally retired/made redundant and so the idea of a layout started to re-emerge to go hand-in-hand with a different life in a house that has a 16m x 8m barn - but no space within it (yet).

 

Having bought stock and track in dribs and drabs since 2003, it is possible to accumulate without needing a lottery win - but you need to be patient and hope that your biological clock doesn't suddenly stop.

 

6 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Are our grand ideas actually practical model ideas

 

I should like to think so - it will very much depend what you want from your layout. As you ask: Is it the building of it? The running of stock? Or doing landscaping? None (or all) of that? It'll be down to a very personal choice. For me it'll be primarily the running of stock once the track is set up - and no, I don(t intend to fall into the trap of 'well, that's now good enough' and not bother with the landscaping and everything else that should make up, in my mind, a holistic approach to creating a model of a railway. Now whether I shall run correctly formed stock or to a time table, we'll have to see .......

 

6 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

So what is it that makes you want to model a certain idea? The scene or scenes, the trains themselves or the operation of the real railway?
One aspect of layout design should be how it’s going to operate, like the real thing or an illusion of it. You could model Waterloo but how would you actually control it with that amount of trains moving in a confined area at once? DCC allows the multiple trains but how do you control the routes and drivers see the signals for something that complex? In cab cameras are one way and a virtual panel to control it or do you set it up as an automated sequence? Is it even practical to get enough people together to drive the trains individually on such a layout? Several large layouts such as the McKinley railway rely on the computer to run the main trains with the operators becoming station pilots or yard shunters effectively. Manpower has to be a consideration because one train running at Waterloo doesn’t look like the real thing ;) 

If you model multiple stations how long does the run need to be minimum between stations? We manage with a few feet on US and 009 modules as the speeds are low and trains fairly short but what do you require for the Flying Scotsman or Atlantic Coast Express at full speed to get a run in? On my HOm I settled at 12ft as the trains were about 3ft long and moved at around 30-40 scale mph.

 

I've got a couple of topics here under the general name 'Dymented'. My idea has always been 'big'. I have always been fascinated by complex trackwork but no skills in track building. I have chosen to model a real place and having had an opportunity to create a railway room within the barn, I can model the station between its two throats at scale length and despite it being only able to accommodate a 5/6coach train, due to grandfathering rights the station can (could) receive full length HSTs - hence why I decided on Ledbury. I lived there for a while and did catch the early morning HST to London from there.

 

Ledbury as the basis of a model has everything going for it - station in a cutting, one end on falling ground with a viaduct on approach and the other end of the cutting becoming deeper and deeper until you arrive at the single bore tunnel. 'But you can't do roundy-roundy'; No, but you can operate it correctly with one mainline train at a time through the tunnel. The other end of the tunnel that was controlled by a signal box on approach will be modelled too.

 

Due to the space now available the station will be modelled not in its reduced 21st century condition but as it was prior to 1955 complete with the branch connection to Gloucester and goods yard.

 

The room has now permitted me to provide a second station at full scale length complete with its own branch connection - Pontrilas and the Golden Valley branch - modelled prior to 1940. Alas the real station is no more. This will have its goods yard too. Here the area is different, the station is on a shelf above the River Dore valley with a short tunnel at one end of the platform and the other end rises into open countryside.

 

There will be a minimum length of track of 10m between stations both sides with plenty of landscaping/tunnels. No need for full speeds as the real thing where I've modelled speed was restricted anyway. The branches will be interlinked so branch line trains could be run from one 'main line station' to other.

 

It will be DCC, but I've no intention of automation, save for some protection each side of the Ledbury tunnel. The trains will be under full control at all times. I've designed it with the thought of being able to run it alone (one train out on the main line and shunting in one of the yards, for example) to being able to have members of the club around who can run multiple trains trains via their mobile phones and wifi - though Hornby's Bluetooth announcement looks very interesting as an alternative. There will be enough to keep 5 operators busy.

 

And where is this layout you may ask? The plastering of the room will be finished tomorrow, with painting and electrics in very short order and the first of the boards will be laid by the end of the month - yay!

 

For me, it's the dream becoming true.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

Oh, go on then, here's the link to the blow-by-blow saga of getting the room ready (only 18 months so far):

 

 

[2ManySpams]

For me there's 5 locations that I'd love to build given the space, time, money and enthusiasm. So basically they won't happen...

 

Tavistock North (LSWR station) complete with the viaduct over the town.

 

Okehampton with the multitude of cutting and forming trains.

 

Exeter Central, the west end, with the bank and trains emerging from the tunnel assisted front and back.

 

Wadebridge set with the town around, evel crossing and river Infront, complete with loco shed.

 

Padstow, the furthest point from Waterloo, including part of the harbour. 

 

Oh, and number 6, on a slightly different theme, Midford on the S&D, complete with viaduct, hillside and WR branch below...

 

All connected by Bulleid Pacifics. Nice.

[RJS1977]

28 minutes ago, 2ManySpams said:

Oh, and number 6, on a slightly different theme, Midford on the S&D, complete with viaduct, hillside and WR branch below...

 

All connected by Bulleid Pacifics. Nice.

 

Like this? 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Are our grand ideas actually practical model ideas?

Mine are, being constrained only by time, cost and - mostly - space.

 

 

[Willie Whizz]

C J Freezer is somewhat ‘out of fashion’ these days, for all his past influence, but he suggested - and I’d agree - that realistically the largest size of layout that ‘one man’ can build, stock, maintain and operate solo, without the whole thing becoming an expensive drain on money, time and enthusiasm, is about 16ft x 8ft, i. e. roughly filling a traditional standard domestic garage (which these days is too small, especially narrow, to accommodate any but the smallest car anyway). 

[Michael Edge]

All my layouts are about twice that size.

[Jol Wilkinson]

3 hours ago, Willie Whizz said:

C J Freezer is somewhat ‘out of fashion’ these days, for all his past influence, but he suggested - and I’d agree - that realistically the largest size of layout that ‘one man’ can build, stock, maintain and operate solo, without the whole thing becoming an expensive drain on money, time and enthusiasm, is about 16ft x 8ft, i. e. roughly filling a traditional standard domestic garage (which these days is too small, especially narrow, to accommodate any but the smallest car anyway). 

 

I wonder what his criteria for "build" was. Would he think the same today, given the wide variety of products readily available ready to use off the shelf or was he thinking

that most of the stock, buildings, etc. had to be handmade by the builder?

 

The layout I am building measures 22.5ft  x 12.5ft  but has a baseboard area of about 80 sq ft. Older layout designs tended to have smaller operating spaces and more baseboard area so his 16ft x 8 ft garage layout probably had the same or greater baseboard area. All the track, stock etc. is/will be hand built. Spread over many years the cost isn't a lot compared with what some people spend on their RTR models for smaller layouts.

[PaulRhB]

5 hours ago, Willie Whizz said:

but he suggested - and I’d agree - that realistically the largest size of layout that ‘one man’ can build, stock, maintain and operate solo, without the whole thing becoming an expensive drain on money, time and enthusiasm, is about 16ft x 8ft,

Glad I didn’t read that as I’m on my third layout bigger than that ;) 

20x10ft

 

26x10ft

 

34x11ft

 

I wouldn’t want to do a show solo but they can be fun to operate on your own as they were all based on country branchlines where running just one train is appropriate. 

The largest of those three was built in three stages, each a standalone layout, over three years and I’ve even built a fourth stage but not made the adapter boards to show it all in one go as stage 4 is also a mini layout in itself. I kept the cost down by recycling stock and materials from the previous layout so in reality it’s costs were spread over twenty years. 
The third one was designed with the idea that the three stations will eventually form the basis of a home layout when it retires and the scenic run sections will be recycled again to provide the trees to wrap it round a room. So that’s one grand plan still at the unknown stage. 

[RJS1977]

CJF originally postulated 20' x 12' (for a 00 layout) as being "The Desirable Maximum", but later trimmed it down to 16' x 8'.

 

I think his reasoning for both limits was that whilst it might be possible for someone to build and maintain a layout larger than that, it would only really be by increasing the distance between stations, platform lengths, curve radii etc rather than by increasing complexity, so, from an operational point of view there would be little advantage in doing so. On the flip side, most people wanting a layout room 20' x 12' or larger would need to build one specially, with all the planning and construction costs etc, and extra heating and maintenance of the building. He could see little sense in going to all that effort and expense if the layout was no more effective than one built in a smaller space. IIRC he finally settled on 16' x 8' as many houses had garages, but few had rooms bigger than that.

[t-b-g]

2 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Glad I didn’t read that as I’m on my third layout bigger than that ;) 

20x10ft

 

26x10ft

 

34x11ft

 

I wouldn’t want to do a show solo but they can be fun to operate on your own as they were all based on country branchlines where running just one train is appropriate. 

The largest of those three was built in three stages, each a standalone layout, over three years and I’ve even built a fourth stage but not made the adapter boards to show it all in one go as stage 4 is also a mini layout in itself. I kept the cost down by recycling stock and materials from the previous layout so in reality it’s costs were spread over twenty years. 
The third one was designed with the idea that the three stations will eventually form the basis of a home layout when it retires and the scenic run sections will be recycled again to provide the trees to wrap it round a room. So that’s one grand plan still at the unknown stage. 

 

Very nice.

 

The layout with three stations very much mirrors my own thoughts on a "Castle Rackrent" style, with a train working along a line carrying out various shunting moves as it goes along. It doesn't matter, for solo use, if only one train is on the move as you concentrate on that one and you can't pay attention to any others.

 

I think the size element is impacted a bit by the scale too.

 

A 20ft 7mm layout is likely to be as complex in terms of amount of track and stock as a much smaller layout in 4mm, 3.5mm, 2mm or other smaller scale.

 

One of the projects I am working on with a friend is an EM gauge one with a scenic run of about 140ft (three times up and down a 40ft shed plus across the ends) divided into 4 separate stations on the main line plus a junction to a single track branch. Each individual station is fairly manageable by a single operator and you can work it solo but it usually runs with the two of us. It is also possible to have a few people round and work a station each, which is when the operation really cranks up a notch and the layout goes from being a fairly gentle secondary line to a full on main line.

 

That layout, plus my small involvement with the Retford project and Laurie Adam's 2mm finescale epic of Yeovil Town and looking after Buckingham, does mean that developing layouts for myself is very much on the back burner as I have plenty to keep me busy.

 

It doesn't stop me dreaming up schemes and even making a start on some admittedly unambitious projects!

[PaulRhB]

I found one of the ideas for the barn layout at a mates house. This was 1/22 G scale Rhätische Bahn musing on incorporating another friend Neils layout, Klein Arosa, on an upper level either above the station on the outside or above the one on the central spine. 
 

 

Neils exhibition layout,

 

Although it looks a bit odd to have the stations close together it actually works quite well for 80’s-2000’s RhB style operation. The first train to arrive pulls in to a stop nearest the station building (The station at the top of the plan actually has a goods loop nearest the building) and waits until the second train arrives, then pulls out allowing the passengers to cross to and from the second train. This staggered arrival is more realistic than both arriving at once which you’d get with equal distanced stations. 
 

As mentioned above we built a large HO layout instead ;) 

[Dagworth]

8 hours ago, Willie Whizz said:

C J Freezer is somewhat ‘out of fashion’ these days, for all his past influence, but he suggested - and I’d agree - that realistically the largest size of layout that ‘one man’ can build, stock, maintain and operate solo, without the whole thing becoming an expensive drain on money, time and enthusiasm, is about 16ft x 8ft, i. e. roughly filling a traditional standard domestic garage (which these days is too small, especially narrow, to accommodate any but the smallest car anyway). 

oh dear...

Dagworth 18'x10'

Ravensclyffe 24'x12'

Ipswich (don't ask)

 

Andi

[PaulRhB]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

One of the projects I am working on with a friend is an EM gauge one with a scenic run of about 140ft (three times up and down a 40ft shed plus across the ends) divided into 4 separate stations on the main line

;) I love that it’s ‘one of the projects’ !

 

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

The layout with three stations

Technically there are five and a bit as two are hidden and only visible to the operators. 

Sorge, a scenic fy, acts as the rest of the HSB network plus as the branch from Walkenried to Unterzorge, labelled as Hidden station on the plan. 

 

The line, at Braunlage, to the left on the level crossing goes to Wurmberg and is a push pull operation to the ski resort but also has a freight siding. It’s only a rudimentary station stuck to the backscene again. It just makes it feel more like a destination than plain plywood. 
 

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by PaulRhB

[Keith Addenbrooke]

2 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

 

 

 

Hi @PaulRhB, I think this really is a very clever design - I love the way the left hand end U-turns have been overlapped scenically to capture the RhB spirit: OK, so I’m thinking of the Albula (Bergün / Preda) rather than the Arosa, but it’s still an easy sell.  I also like the way it’s set up for prototypical staggered arrivals and departures from the top station (as described on the commentary in your post).  Plenty of viaducts to choose from too.

 

Have you tried re-scaling this for the Bemo Om range?  Just a thought, Keith.

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke

[PaulRhB]

12 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Have you tried re-scaling this for the Bemo Om range?  Just a thought, Keith.

It would be exactly half the size but the aisles would be challenging ;) Also you’d probably need to handbuild all the track as Ferro Suisse has just closed down. 
 

If I ever had a shed that big I think I’d be stuck between several ideas and would probably build three layouts that could be stored underneath the frame and set up for a few months each. I’ll worry about that if I ever get the shed ;) 

 

[pH]

On 30/12/2022 at 06:53, scottystitch said:

 

Not sure it qualifies as a "greatest layout...", but this is one I designed for a friend of a friend to fit within his integral garage converted, like mine, to a "hobbies room".  Dumbarton East at the top and Dumbarton Central at the bottom.  The idea was to have passenger trains running computer controlled between the upper and lower fiddle yards (initially Standard tanks and LHCS later upgraded to "Blue Trains" when he'd gotten 'round to 3D designing them - with associated Overhead wiring) whilst he shunted the centrepiece Dumbarton East Goods.  Alas mortality had other ideas and it remains simply an idea.  Which is a shame.  Both stations and the goods yard are drawn to scale.

 

N gauge, code 55.

 

Best

 

Scott.

For a long time, I’ve thought Dumbarton East would make a good model, with the mainline as a part-hidden ‘roundy-roundy’.