Building a layout takes some time. Duriung this period, new technologies appear and you get more and more experience.

What would you do different (or not) when you would make a all new start?

I myself would:
Still use Marklin AC!!
Still use my IB;
Use LISSY instead of instead of contactrail//signals with brake modules.
Would use the Uhlenbrock Loconet system instead of 10.0000 kilometres of wires
Would keep in mind to test first and then build the scenery
Would still be using K-track
Would again be using Viesmann signals
Would not be using Marklin contact rail
Would put more effort in y design to make it more ergonomical

What are your thoughts??

I agree with Larry. I have a few hidden areas that are very difficult to get access to. I also have e double crossover on a slight incline that always gives me trouble. I would bring the feeding tracks up to level before this. (It is right where they come out of the tunnel under my city). Other than that, I am quite happy.

Storage yards, I would allow a huge amount of space for storage yards.

Strangely I would still have a terminus station rather than a circle.

Modern Image, although I am rather focused on Epoch 2b, Epoch 5 or is it 6 now has a certain appeal!

Access........ If I can't get to it comfortably ; change it.

Storage ..... Shadow station.

Multi level.. Use a helix to change levels and save space.

Very interesting topic.I would like more loco sheds for my turntable
and longer straight sections.

Another kind of traffic on the layout...

Not the same all the times layout...!

Goofy

I notice the storage yards are mentioned frequently. 'd probalbly also build a larger shadow station so I'd have an excuse to buy more trains. With longer tracks also, so I can run 200 cm freight trains.

The epoch item mentioned by mmrcnzjohn is interesting. Havent thought about that. I'd probably go for III and IV again but with an Austrian / Italian / Swiss focus instead of German.

I would have started with modules, now I 'had' to sell my first layout. I'd still do US transition era. But perhaps DCC 2R instead... [:I] More diesels to choose from...

Speaking of catenary, I originally had 100% coverage including hidden areas and ran all my e-loks from the catenary. I had no operational problems, but the amount of maintenance that was required to keep the hidden spans working properly just became too much, so I removed it all and installed "capture and release" sections at the entrances to hidden areas. I cannot imagine having an Era III or later European layout without catenary, but I would not again put the effort into wiring hidden areas.

As to storage, you never have enough. I have "online" hidden stations to hold 11 trains plus another 6 "offline", and have visible station space for another 7 but still wish for more. Plan as many as you can possibly fit in.

I'd expand the idea I already have, 3-4 loops of open main---one under wire, one AC, I'd lengthen them and add access to hidden storage tracks. I learned long ago that I just like running them. Sidings and such have always been put in for scenic effect and not ops.

Its Interesting that no-one has talked about space.

I have 28 square meters of space and have used 14.5 of it for the layout. Lots of room to move around and most importantly for me no duck-unders.

John

Wouldn't we all! My ideal room would be 7 x 4 meters

No, my room is only 5 meters by 6 meters, and it also has a chest freezer and my Beer Fridge in it!

5 Meter width is excellent, but a 9 meter length would have enabled me to build my station using wide radius turnouts.

I would take more into consideration accesability!

No... I would not need more space. At least not at the moment ;-)

I am happy with K-track. Would definatly not go to C-track. If anything, to 2-rail, but I am not even thinking about that.

I would consider digitalization. NOT that I feel that I need all the bells and whistles that it brings, but because I feel left out of the "New Items" band-waggon. I would love to have some of the new models, and support the company, but currently the SDS-models runs terribly on my layout.

To try something totally different, I would like to do a very "dynamic" WW II / DRG layout. With lots of action going on, on the layout. (Mind you that I am interrested in this for its technical and historical reasons. NOT for political reasons...)
A layout where all the minitanks could be swapped around, and seized buildings could fly the german banner during one session, and -say- a british the next. Bridges could be removed (blown up) and alternate routings employed.

Yes a bit biger and i would place a couple of pop up doors in the lay out to reach hard places .I also like HXMIESA idea of WW2 layout I also dont care about political drama.I love the butifull planes ,ships ,trains and other machinery that wear built. Just to bad it was for war.Regarles still butiful ingerniring.One idea for that layout would be from that movie VONRION EXPRESS staring MR FRANK SINATRA.Also an airfield with some planes like the FOLKWULF & ME 262 .I could go on fore ever but would need a football field to put it all. HAPPY HOLLIDAY ,PAT N CECE

On my US layout, I would now try to use NMRA-compatible 2R-tracks, code 83, with Erbert studs as well. Looks way better than K-track, especially the turnouts. 3R is still ok for me, and my 3R-conversions of 2R rolling stuff work nicely.

A shadow station would be great as well, and may still come as a separate module for my present layout, when I have more space available.

Larger curve radii (R5+), so I could run more of that fabulous Walthers stuff, or an interesting 1920's triplex steamer. Presently, however, no space available.

Control by IB or Ecos would be great, with DCC capabilities. This would make a realistic multi-unit consist possible. Well, Christmas coming soon .

Hans Martin

I think, instead of building a new layout, adapting mine. The new item introduced by Evil R and his mention of Lissy opens new perspectives for me. I'm struggling with the best system for brake sections because I run Motorola and DCC systems together. But after looking at what the capabilities of the Lissy system are, I think it's worth to invest in it.

So the new layout will be the same but with new possibilities.

Hi Tivvy,

I'm not so electronically literate, but I'm always eager to learn. What did Perz developed ? I don't find any thread here.

I prefer not to re-invent the wheel.

If it happens to be a hobby of yours, then that's fine, but for me life is too short to spend it messing around trying to design something that someone else has already produced.

I'll pay a little more for a ready made control system, and spend my time playing with the trains.

Ray

Since my train recognition system is discussed:

I haven't designed any release quality software for it yet, but I know at least two other people who have used my design in different ways. None of them have written their own control software, but have instead built "adapters" that simulate some other device supported by their control software. I have helped them with this, but the requirements I have seen in the questions I have got have been too diverse to design a "golden" solution.

.....

Now to the actual topic:

1. The next layout I will build will probably be small enough to have set up permanently, and it will not be modular as the one I have now.

Modules is a nice concept but it puts too much restrictions on the track plan. What I have now is not really a modular layout in the normal sense (no nice interface between the modules), but a layout built in sections that can be taken apart for storage. But it is still too limiting. I used the modular/sectional approach because the appartment where I lived then was too small for any permanent layout at all. And once I had started with the modules it was too temptating to just grow it.

2. I will probably use K-track. Not that I dislike C-track, but K-track has some advantages when it comes to track geometry. This means that you can fit the same principal track plan into significantly less area if you use K-track instead of C-track (M-track is somewhere in between). This is very important if space is a restriction.

3. I will prepare houses etc. better for inner lighting. I didn't do that from the start. I have tried retrofitting in a few cases, but it is more difficult than doing it carefully from the start.

4. I will apply weathering on houses etc. when I build them. I didn't have enough skills to do that when I built the houses for my current layout, so I am happy that I did not have that ambition then. Bad weathering is worse than no weathering, in my opinion.

5. I will probably prepare for train detection/recognition with my own infrared system plus contact tracks plus current sensing, and possibly passive IR on some places too. Lots of redundant detection possibilities, using different independent methods. Then if I am really going to use everything is another, later, question.

6. I will probably add catenary. It was too difficult with the modular approach (and I considered it too expensive too, when I started).

7. I will have more levels, including a hidden yard.

8. I will use more wood and cardboard, not just styrofoam as I do now. This will be necessary to be able to fit a complicated multi-level track-plan into a small area. Styrofoam is nice to work with but it builds too much both height and side ways.

Took me long enough to put mine completely back together after moving it!

... and be happy with what you already have!

You're right, there's always space for one more loco, but I am yet to discover how to enlarge my train room

Oh this is so simple.

What would I change?

THE HOUSE

seems like space for most people here is at a premium, but does any one have an amusement park with rides featured/included on their layout? these seem like common items on ebay from faller/vollmer/kibri.