 Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Same operational effect strictly at water level with less ramp building and shortened outer loop = 12 m and inner loop = 5 m (ignoring future station trackage, respectively).  Serving suggestion:  |
|
 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Adding some interest with the help of a mine next to the lower main line plus a high line coming from the "off"?  |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
For reference: Former DRGW Eagle River line south of Belden.  Belden mine siding just next to the DRGW main line track.  |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
In case somebody wondered what the station could look like: Just an initial sketch... The idea of combining two „mattress-size“ foam board-base modules for the ease of transport, tracks to connect both modules in a confined area at one end for the ease of separation. One board is to represent a canyon scene, loosely inspired by the former DRGW Eagle River line south of Belden. For the board on the other side of a central divider I envisage a stacked terminal railroad, a parking space, stuffed with rolling stock. Return blobs = 4 m long = EMD F7 ABBA + 16 tin plate 50 feeters (or 20 plastic 40 feeters) + caboose. Then, there are two separate racetracks (thus each river bank served by another line). Matching tunnel portals are marked with letters. Red letters indicate the first circuit and violet letters indicate the second one. The only ramp is (partially) hidden under the elevated town; the double-track ramp allows for train meets. Lower level stub tracks extending under the town and elevated passenger station are meant for freight cars. Stub tracks on the upper level are meant for passenger trains. Trackage in the lower left hand corner is for displaying large motive power. So flat, good, square fun.  |
|
4 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Forum member BrandonVA made me think: Why note evolve on an existing "successful" design? So, working from my L-shaped layout "Badland", I came up with improvements. 1. Convert mainline from double to single track, which: - is more prototypical for US railroads; - makes the line look longer; - leaves more room for landscaping. 2. Fill the access bay with a Styrofoam hill, allowing to lay new rails on track level 4 to create a long siding for train meets (currently happening on the double track section). to shift train meets which took place on the former double track section.  |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Then, by altering the track level 0 the following goals are achieved - two trains running on two separate circuits (red and green); - two tracks separated by a river.  Considering that higher track levels are overlaying the lowest one, the visible parts of track level 0 would be as follows.  |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Rotating the last sketch allows for comparison with a historic photo of the former Belden mine siding on the - now dormant - Tennessee Pass main line in Colorado.  |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
 July 1956 issue of MODEL TRAINS. The cartoonist is R.O. Gilbert |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
As I have to live up to my reputation, I dreamt up another ultimate layout condensation - see snapshots. Max. size 4 x 8 ft. The evolution:  1. The starting point is - what else - a dogbone. To save space - what else - the station area is placed inside one of the reversing loops. When having both loops visually separated and throwing the station loop turnout alternatively into either direction, and when viewing only the station loop area, the illusion is created that a train leaves the station to X-town and returns from X-town after some time, before leaving to Y-town before later returning from Y-town. In a similar manner, the same illusion would be created for the stationless mainline loop behind a scenic divider. 2. How to cope with long trains on a limited station surface? Coiling. On a helix. 3.Then condense the entire contraption by folding and twisting. Finetuning:  Conceal the station helix (or helix station), display an intimidating station throat and have station tracks disappear in the scenic divider under a faux station façade and/or road bridge in front of a city backdrop (has been done before, I was told). Wham, that's whimsical model railroading. Full roundtrip form would be 20 m. |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Note to myself on basic functionality of above design. When having a dogbone with reversing loops, the latter need to be concealed for the sake of plausibility. This is eating precious space. The idea is to adapt a dogbone for making it socially acceptable to leave one or even both reversing loops in the open. A station would be sitting in the loop area instead of being located in between the loops and would still see a train departing into one direction and see the same train returning from the same direction. Both large and small layouts could benefit from this approach. Sprung turnouts allow for "mechanic automation".  Prototypical train running appearance to be reached by either concealing one blob and the hidden blob taking over shadow station duties...  ... or having a "solid" view block separating both blobs.  Blobs do *not* need to be equally sized. One blob could have a train-lenght size and the other one could fill a room with book shelf right of way running along the walls. Alternatively, blobs could be stacked, twisted and folded. The "Hosentraeger"double crossover could be placed in a curve etc. |
|
4 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Pragmatism might be needed to make ends meet when space is limited.   |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
E.g., for a study like this one on 100 x 200 cm:  Has it been tested? Yes, sort of:  :o) |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Trying to combine my beloved complicated station throats with a separate landscape by combining two modules is too space consuming for my taste. So I was thinking of stacking the two modules, dreaming up the 100 x 200 cm "Train-Room Mush-Room". A basement with a visible station throat and concealed coiling area for long trains crowned by an attic with a landscaped section.  |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
For the landscaped attic, I envisage to elaborate on an earlier design to make it fit on 100 x 200 cm.  A quick mock-up demonstrates the feasibility on 100 x 200 cm. Flat:  Elevated:  All curves with easements. Upper return blob not included yet. Edited by user 24 May 2018 12:06:08(UTC)
| Reason: typo |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
First train-room mush-room basement attempts, starting with an oval helix with sidings coiled around the latter. Mind you that eventually only the outer two sidings shall be visible, while the "distribution clockwork" inside is concealed in the support structure on which the landscaped "attic" is supposed to rest.   Then a trial incorporating the inverted return loop concept presented here: https://www.marklin-user...d-innovations#post537826  The inverted return loop looks quite pleasant, but the overall result does not convince me. The curved turnouts behind the overpass are difficult to reach. Furthermore, the trackage looks not "fluid" enough. Both trials deliver toy-like results, and styrofoam characteristics do nor allow for a connection to the attic. In addition, inner "distribution clockwork" turnouts are hard to reach. And most prominently, my minimum siding storage capacity requirement of a EMD F7 ABBA + 16 tin plate box cars (50 ft) + 1 caboose is not met: The inner siding capacity is one box car short, respectively. |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Today the breakthrough, a more sophisticated looking solution. I present Huevo depot, where Fanta Se and Grande lines merge to form the joint line to D’enfer (founded by French colonists), which is represented by the double track return blob (in the future mostly concealed). ATSF interchange to La Quinta is represented by the stub for the Mini Chief train, of course cutting recklessly through Grande tracks. The ascending line leads to Tennessee Williams Pass. The ceiling - 20 cm - of the underworld is ca. 1 cm below the loose end of high line. The styrofoam-soaked images cannot properly replicate the awesomeness of the appearance, but it is really looking good. :o)    Oh yes, another test passed: Even the shorter inner blob track is holding the obligatory ABBA + 16 box cars (50 ft) + caboose. Track plan.  Red = ascent to the upper world. Stub tracks still subject to change without prior notice. According to the track planner, there are considerable gaps, which I did not „feel“ when plugging together the ensemble. Further, according to the plan, dimensions are 101 x 211 cm, while I squeezed it effortlessly on a 100 x 200 cm surface. Edited by user 12 July 2018 11:57:23(UTC)
| Reason: typo |
|
6 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Train-room mush-room basement mock-up.  |
|
5 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Further to post 122.  163 x 163 cm (access bay 65 x 65 cm). Out and back operations - at least twice around - with train meet in between. Ruling grade 4.3%. |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
A forum member enquired if the design could be adapted to accommodate a Big Boy on a Walthers 130´(47 cm) turntable. I believe so.  Siding length extended and stub terminal replaced by a concealed double track return blob. Still on 163 x 163 cm, but the access bay shrunk to 60 x 60 cm. |
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
|
|
7 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
No circles or ovals involved here, but the mainline disappearing behind the tunnel portals could be curved. In addition, the first pair of crossovers to the right could be replaced by curved turnouts "swinging up left", thereby further reducing space requirements. Or the mainline could be connected to the reverse loop module like the one presented in the previous post, which would allow for turning and storing steam locomotives.  This is a C track interpretation of the classic Minories concept by the late C. J. Freezer which was first published in 1957. The plan allows to model vibrant urban passenger (and express goods) traffic without requiring a great deal of space. Trains are hauled in by one locomotive that would then be uncoupled and remain caught until a fresh locomotive - having waited in the loco pocket - hauls away in the opposite direction. What I admire is how S-curves are avoided, thus ensuring nice swinging coach movements. https://en.wikipedia.org...Minories_(model_railway) Note: folded in half lengthwise using a removable girder road bridge to hide the hinges. |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 21/09/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,657 Location: Toronto
|
Hi, Al: Very interesting topic and pictures.  Could explain what the yellow bars in post 170 do? Thanks. Silvano |
|
1 user liked this useful post by baggio
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Originally Posted by: baggio  Could explain what the yellow bars in post 170 do? The author doesn´t say, but looking at a later blog photo (see attached), it seems as if they were placed in preparation of "filling" the tracks.  |
|
5 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 03/06/2013(UTC) Posts: 130 Location: Melbourne, VIC, Australia
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Today the breakthrough, Alsterstreek, this is awesome. Love your work. |
- Herman |
5 users liked this useful post by hvc
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Originally Posted by: hvc Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Today the breakthrough Alsterstreek, this is awesome. Love your work. Thank you. The urban planning committee has decided to press forward with the project, which has been baptized "Hi-Land". Further progress to be reported under: https://www.marklin-user...d-and-Hi-Land#post554814 |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
|
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
|
|
5 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
Browsing through the gent's website I tried to understand the intricate N-scale track plan, which is a combination of dog bone courses.  http://www.enndingen.de/.../ennderennsbruck2012.jpgThe circles on the lower right hand side represent a triple helix. There seems to be a shadow station (covered by a visible station area?) connected to the lines pointing into the void.... |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
|
|
3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
|
|
5 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
 by Carl Robert Fallberg  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC) Posts: 3,996 Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
|
|
1 user liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 4,253 Location: westernmost
|
|
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 05/12/2004(UTC) Posts: 2,784 Location: NY, NY
|
I too am a big believer in building a layout where the era can be dictated by the rolling stock, not the rest of the layout. And with european locales it really isn't that difficult Some issues in cities, but thats about it. Of course it all depends how much you plan on superdetailing your layout. Since my other love is cars, I have no problem swapping out the 1/87 vehicles as well :) |
FS + SBB Era 2-5 and Vintage Marklin |
1 user liked this useful post by 5HorizonsRR
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
