Hello, Everyone.

My layout is 39" by 73" and I run around this perimeter my two-way system.

Inside the above space, I run my Marklin trains.

As a result, the usable space for my Marklin portion is about 6" less all around: 33 x 67".

Both tracks are in very simple ovals, one inside the other.

I have not used my train set up very often in the last couple of years since this layout is overall pretty boring.

Question: Does anyone have any SIMPLE ideas on how to make the Marklin layout more fun (and/or how to combine the two in a more fun way)?

Ideally, I would love to have a second level, even bought one helix to do this, but the space does not seem to allow for it.

Thanks.

Sounds intriguing, but that is not what I had in mind.

I am actually considering a smaller version of Mike's layout with a train going up a ramp on one side and coming down on the other as he does. But I am not sure if the space I have (33" X 67") would allow for that.

Hi, Harold.

Thanks for the greeting and the very helpful link.

Given the size of my layout, I may have to resort to just having a second level without going from one level to another.

So, the bottom level would be R2 in two-rail (called R3 by Roco) and inside this oval, I would put a second level with an R1 Marklin oval.

The result would look a bit like Mike's, but without the ability to go up and down. Pity, but my basement space is very limited.

In any event, tomorrow I will talk to Mike and see what he can suggest.

Edited by user 19 November 2020 20:52:05(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Would it be possible with a narrower layout that could be up against a wall combined with reverse loops at one or both ends? A reverse loop could be made portable so that it could be removed when not running trains in order to save space, a reverse loop could also be at an angle to the main part. That way you could have the central part of the layout with longer stretches of track and a yard and a station.

You hit the nail n the head, Al: Ramp-building is for me apparently impossible because of the lack of space.

My understanding is ramps have to be long by necessity so that the rise is not too sharp.

Having said that, I wonder if an R1 curve could be made to rise ten inches, much like Mike's layout, but with a smaller radius.

What do you think?

Thanks.

I like reverse loops a lot, but by their nature prevent you from running two trains one behind the other since one train could be coming back while the next is still not completely inside the loop. Something to consider, however.

Thanks for the suggestion.

Welcome back! An option for the two level approach is double loops underneath and a switching layout on the upper part. The following has a series of small switching layouts for ideas. Note the first part is British and the second part is North American.

Switching layouts

Thanks

NEAT!

Hi Silvano,

Check out this post!

https://www.marklin-user...asic-figure-8-track-plan

Instead of having one layout inside the other, why don't you design it so that at some point, the DC layout drops down about 5cm and the AC layout rises about 5 cm. That would then give you a spot where one could go over/under the other and you could then escape the simple oval concept.

If you like operations, like shunting and putting together trains, a yard is an interesting idea, but I don't think that I would want to have that as the main feature of my layout.

I like the idea of having a wide curve at the ends. Perhaps you can mix this with a helix to access a hidden storage area (Station) underneath, where you could keep multiple trains so that it is not just the same one going round and round.

I've pretty much decided that if I eventually set up a permanent layout, I would like it to have a station (not a Hauptbahnhof although that would be cool), but big enough that large trains might stop and I would like to have some kind of showpiece track, where a complete train could be seen. I would also like to have a local train going from the station that might involve tighter radii, maybe using push-pull trains that could come and go so I would not have to use reverse loops.

In your case, you could use the 2 rail DC for the showpiece part of the layout and the Maerklin for the local line. If you don't like the push-pull idea, you can use a reverse loop to enable the trains to turn around. from the station, it would either rise up or drop down so that it could pass over or under the mainline and go on it's way.

If you have more questions, I do not have a definite plan, but I can help with suggestions.

Regards

Mike C

Mike C:

"In your case, you could use the 2 rail DC for the showpiece part of the layout and the Maerklin for the local line. If you don't like the push-pull idea, you can use a reverse loop to enable the trains to turn around. from the station, it would either rise up or drop down so that it could pass over or under the mainline and go on it's way."

This sounds like something to be incorporated in the other suggestion above, the first one.

I Love it, Al!

Was it difficult for the trains to climb the slopes?

(Maybe I should buy myself a race track, too, as a Christmas present... )

Al, you are a tempting devil...

Al, which of the two layouts is more complicated to put together, the "slot car" clone or the other one?

I am thinking that the latter is easier and may be more susceptible to making adaptations for space or otherwise.

What say you?

This is about the size of John Allen’s original Gorre and Daphetid layout which he incorporated into the final layout he ended up building in a much larger space. I think the plan is included in 101 Layouts by Kalmbach publishing.
It’s famous enough that you could probably find the plan on the internet.
Try this. https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/33717

I created a new thread for the styrofoam ramps:
https://www.marklin-user...5827-DIY-styrofoam-ramps