Joe you nailed it again

Let me tell you about your advice to begin building kits now even if you do not have a layout. It works great. I have been wanting a large layout ever since reading about the V&O in RMC decades ago. Life got in the way. Had planned several built a 4x8 for my kids and collected locomotives and cars and structures.

I have been building kits, and hitting E-bay, train shows etc. for others. Ready to run means ready to disassemble as far as I am concerned, as generally all things assembled by others with some exceptions. I have found that cars built right out of the box will generally work fine in trains of about 30 to 40 cars but for longer trains some extra work is needed.

Back to the point, Storage boxes do a good job of protecting car kits and allow modeling time even if there is no room for a layout. A club will allow access to a layout and even though it may not be exactly what you would have built it is still a place to run trains.

Buildings maybe built or left unassembled as they are easier to store in an unassembled fashion. Think steel mill rather than houses and signal towers. Getting the structures and cars needed for your dream layout ahead of time spreads out the cost and allows one to do something even in the absence of a layout. It also allows one to acquire those kits that go out of production as well. Another item to purchase is track, I have got a supply of that as well and have a stack of switches but after looking at the fast tracks jigs I will be building my own in the future. Some of the higher quality track work is very expensive.

Great job on the magazine

You get another 5 stars

On Target

That's good advice.  Once you get the layout going, it's too easy to get bogged down in tasks that don't contribute to the layout itself getting completed.  It certainly helps to have a decent roster ready to operate as you get track down.  In the amount of time it takes to detail and paint a locomotive, or to build a nice structure, you could have a lot of track, wiring, or scenery complete. 

Sometimes structures do become location-specific, so be careful thinking how structures are to be used before potentially wasting effort on something that won't fit on the future layout.  Don't trap yourself into forcing the layout design around buildings or bridges that wouldn't otherwise fit.

If you look around my layout, you'll find a lot of partially finished structures, unweathered cars, and scenes with minimal detail.  My priority has been getting scenery presentable so the layout overall looks complete.  It seems to me that having ground cover, weathered track, and ballast have a huge impact on visitors compared to other tasks.  I'll go back later and add the little stuff, and won't feel like I've invested effort into something that's pushing the overall goal of a finished layout farther into the future.  I realize making multiple "passes" to add detail isn't to everyone's liking, but it works for me.

Understand that compromise is almost a requirement for getting a large layout done.  I've run into a few guys who talk big about how perfect that dream layout of theirs will be.  Handlaid track on individual tie plates, every loco and car a contest-caliber model representing a specific prototype, every structure a scratchbuilt masterpiece.  Rarely do I see any of these layouts getting anywhere.  If your goal is outstanding individual models, a giant basement empire might devolve quickly into nothing but frustration.  Something smaller, that you have a realistic hope of completing, may be a better choice.  Commit yourself to a project with a scope that you can manage.

Furthermore, understand that a large layout requires something of a commitment in time and money.  If you have a lot of draws on your time, or choose to spend your disposable income on other pursuits, the layout may not happen.  If you like spending time and money on vacations, or having a lot of other "toys" like boats or ATVs, you may find the layout isn't a high enough priority to see much progress.  Again, scale back your expectations so you don't get overwhelmed.

Another point is something addressed by previous editorials - don't put off acquiring skills.  If you can't have that big layout now, use what hobby time you do have to hone your abilities.  I see too may would-be layout builders who think they'll get that major project going someday, without doing anything to prepare themselves.  You'll reach retirement and have no idea what to do because you've squandered decades during which you could have built the necessary skills.  Build some modules, or a shelf layout in the den, but DO SOMETHING!

don't put off acquiring skills.

Yeah, I too think skills are more important than stuff. Experiment with different things like detailing freight cars, weathering, scratch building/kit bashing buildings, installing decoders( or maybe battery systems), trouble shooting/cleaning wheels:> ),(just need a short test track to experiment, I've got about a short section of track for each gauge I've modeled in), prototype research for possible layouts, etc. Just buying stuff and storing it doesn't help as much as some experience when it's time to cut wood for a layout. The big problem I see with buying stuff is by the time a layout is built the plans have changed so many times the stuff is not appropriate. Now if you bought the stuff cheap and it's now more dear this might be a good thing but if you store it for years and can't get your money back it's a double whammy.....DaveB

Truths and Words of Wisdom

Lots of truths posted here.  And words of wisdom that I wish I had realized years ago.  I've been working on my somewhat large home layout for close to two years now, and despite working on it every weekend, I am somewhat disappointed at the progress to date.  I went through a lengthy period of doing nothing (of a construction nature), just waiting for the day to come when I could start on the layout.  Finally that day came and I got started.

But all was not well.  I was surprised when I would start a task utilizing skills that I had "mastered" many years ago and find it so difficult and time consuming to complete.  It seems that you must not only learn the skills, but keep using them in order to retain them.

I've finally reached the conclusion that I've essentially lost all of the skills I had acquired in the 60s, 70s and 80s.  I now look at all I do from a beginners perspective.  True, re-acquiring the skills is a bit easier since I had done it years before, but it's still time lost.

Another thing though, is to develop new skills for working with the new materials, using new techniques that didn't exist many years ago.

I sure wish I had been building car kits over the past decade. 

I have what many would call a

A Great Concept!

Your "Marching Through the decade"  idea is a real answer I would guess for many of us.  I originally was to model the mid-'50s, first gen diesels with possibly some steam still around.  Then I really liked those great Atlas SD-24s, so a little shift later.  Then those nice looking Stewart GE U-25B s, Atlas Alco C-25 s, FR two-bay ACF hoppers came out, and I was starting to like EMD replacement diesels  and I was almost at 1965!

This concept allows a rotating schedule that can satisfy those modelers like me that can't nail down a modeling time frame to a specific year. 

Great idea,

Bob Bochenek

"Marching Through the decade"

Why decide what to run by the calendar instead of just configuring the era as you feel like at any given time? Once you have all the stuff for the different eras I don't see any reason to wait to change if you  get tired of the existing era? I certainly wouldn't abandon an era I was enjoying just because the calendar turned over? .......DaveB 

Setting goals and expectations

Large layouts can be very intimidating and can quickly become such a large project that you just don't know what to do next.  Try setting some very modest goals like finishing the bench work on the west side of the room by the end of April.  Put these goals on a white board hanging in the layout room.  that way you and your crew knows what's happening now and what's next.  Get something running as soon as possible.  Even if the running is only back and forth in a yard.  This will let you run some of the equipment that has been in boxes for years.  It will get inspired to get a little more track work done.  It will let you see what some of your wiring issues might be. 

If there is a skill you are not comfortable with, ask for help from other modelers.  When you start on scenery, start at the farthest point away from your main entrance.  Your scenery skills will progress as you approach the main entrance.  Once you get the first pass at scenery done, go back to the first scenery done and now with your much better skill set you can 'adjust' it!  Whatever you do make sure you are having fun! 

If you have a crew of friends helping make sure that they have input into the layout, they need to feel they are a part of the project.  You are the boss but they are your crew, not just for the build but for the running.  Treat them good and your layout will be terrific.  This article in MRH was right on and has some unique ideas about how to keep the layout fresh.  Listening to your crew can help also.

My current project is an ON30 triple deck 20x40 layout.  It is being done with just two of us.  Knowing it was just the two of us, we designed the layout with out a lot of complicated track work.  Minimal scenery for now as the widest portion of the layout is only a foot or two.  The rest is yards and the turntable area, so once again not much scenery.  We did all of the wood work first before any track.  Once we started on track we did about 100 feet or so and then stopped and concentrated on getting DCC working for just that track.  Then we added in 4 switch machines and got those running on DCC.  During this time we started running some different rail cars and a couple of the engines.  This helps to debug the equipment and the first 100 feet of track.  Then we add another bunch of track and repeat the process.  Each new batch of track makes the running more fun with more cars and engines and some structures, still no scenery.  We want to be able to run the mainline without scenery for a while to get it debugged. 

I love the hobby, the challenge of such a big layout, and the fun of doing ON30 model railroading.  I also completely enjoy the MRH!  Russ

Yeah, but.....

Joe,

Very encouraging and well written article, but, as the title says, BUT......

At my age, I figure I've got one shot to get this right the first time. So the ideas have been researched and the plans mentally sketched out, THEN we decide to move. Out of state. 450 miles plus or minus. But we don't have a date other than "the next grand child is coming in late July, so when does my wife retire?" How soon can we sell the condo and relocate? Seriously.

I'd be most interested in how others have worked around a move. Do you build all the craftsman kits and pack them best you can and pray for their safe conveyance? Do you super detail and get the painting and weathering done now and pray all moves okay? Do you build modules that can be strung together after you've settled in?

That light at the end of the tunnel I thought was layout begun and "completed" turns out to be an EM-1 with 75 loaded hopper cars behind it.

Decisions! Decisions! And very little knowledge to go with them.

More Siskiyou Line Layout Please!

I to would like to see

I to would like to see something New on the Siskiyou Line Layout?   Thanks Craig

Okay, you may get your wish

Okay, you may get your wish ... I'm tentively planning on a Siskiyou Line blitz next year sort of like the Allagash bash we're doing this year.

That would mean a bunch of new Siskiyou Line articles, ebooks and videos next year.

Would that fill the bill?

P.S. And of course, those of you coming to the Portland 2015 NMRA Convention could check out the Siskiyou Line in person. We're also likely to be hosting op sessions as well ... so if you want more Siskiyou Line in 2015, I'm seeing if I can make it happen ... on all levels.

"Where Are All The People?"

Joe

I can relate. I am forever getting comments suggesting that my Quebec & New England represents a post nuclear war scenario. There are no people anywhere on the layout. The roads are pretty barren too. My excuse is that I can't find vehicles from the 1980's. Lots from the 90's - just a little too modern. I also tell people that I am building the layout in layers: benchwork, roadbed, track, wiring, ballast, roads, buildings, scenery ... they nod off before I can get to telling them about the details, like people.

I fell into the trap of focusing all my energy (and money) in my pre-layout years on building a car and locomotive fleet. I figured that since I knew the era (late 1980's) and I knew what area the layout represented (New England), but I had no idea what the layout was actually going to look like, it was the best use of my resources. After 20 years of accumulating several hundred cars and a few dozen locomotives, I realized that the level of detail and quality of the latest products was so much better than my earlier purchases that I just had to keep on buying - so much so that I have now retired and replaced most of the fleet! So much for staying ahead of the curve.

Sheldon

I dream of having a large space someday....

...but then I look at how long it takes me to get things done on my small layout and I wonder if I'd ever get anything done in a large layout space.  Of course I doubt that large space will even come till after I've retired so the one thing I will have more of is time.  Money is also an issue. No sense having that large space if you don't have the money to fill it.  I think in reality my dream is not only for the large space but also to have the money to have someone plan and build the layout up to the benchworked, tracked and wired stage and then being able to spend my time happily running trains and building scenery for the whole shebang. That would be my ultimate. I'd probably pay to have structures built too. I love doing scenery but  things like structure building have become more an "necessary evil" than an enjoyment for me.

Michael

I doubt that large space will even come till after I've retired

and then you might not feel like building a large layout. If you want to build a large layout when you retire start taking good care of your health now. Things that seem easy when you are young seem harder when you get older:> ) Exercise, eat well, and build up modeling skills so the work won't be too hard when the day comes.........DaveB

The Limits to Growth

Yes, preparing stuff for the layout when you are away from the layout is a great use of available time, whether it is pre creating the layout or because you are travelling. When I was doing far too much work-related travelling, I always took along a couple of detailing or construction projects that I could work on in a hotel room. You can get away with a surprisingly compact travelling toolkit, too. I work in N scale, and it is astonishing how much of anything it takes to fill even a classic wide open space to achieve a measure of realism. You can put a lifetime of modelling into a cityscape or a well treed, mountainous landscape. Someone mentioned people on the layout - painting thousands of N scale figures to even the most basic of standards can consume huge numbers of hours. Definitely something to tackle for an hour here and there whenever the mood takes you, and you have the opportunity. Even fifteen minute sessions with a single colour and brush add up surprisingly fast and can partially cover a whole lot of miniature figures on the spur or in a multi-figure jig.

I also endorse using jigs for hand-laid trackwork, because when a layout grows large, ultimately maintenance becomes the limit to growth. Everything requires maintenance, and this is true whether you operate frequently or infrequently, and no matter what measures you put in place to inhibit decay (or reduce entropy). Even the most carefully laid trackwork will eventually develop problems, and problems always take longer than you would like to fix. In fact, detecting problems also becomes an issue in preventive maintenance, because it is really unfortunate to find yourself using operating sessions (especially those involving other people) to find your problems, and then having to try to rectify them in fast clock time.

Some of us prefer to do everything ourselves, working alone, which is a personal choice, but comes with automatic limits to growth from the time available to you. Many hands really do make light work, and the layout will benefit from input by others, not to mention the pleasures of congenial company while working on a shared project. In any community with a population of more than a few thousand it is almost certainly possible to find people who will be delighted to help you out, often because they as yet aren't in a position to have a layout of their own. Think of it as informal clubbing.

My current N scale monster in progress (eighteen years and counting) has benefited from three classic principles:

(1) Take the time to build everything as carefully as possible, to minimize the maintenance needed down the line, so to speak. Working incrementally as much as possible, test every component as thoroughly and as soon as you can until it is as near perfect as makes no difference. It really helps to have well-documented standards for everything, too. Once you are there, add the component to the appropriate maintenance schedule. This really does pay big dividends over time.

(2) Come up with careful and detailed maintenance schedules for everything: benchwork, track, electrical, scenery, locomotives, rolling stock, lighting, signalling, control systems, sound systems, animations, DUST... Everything, and stick to them. Simply creating these schedules gives you a fair idea of when you are heading into territory that is too big for your available resources. It is no fun reaching the point where you can't work on new projects because every available moment is consumed by maintenance. And skimping on maintenance simply doesn't help, because when you do finally get to it, it will take longer and cost more, of everything. Just remember, everything has a life cycle, it is just the periodicity that varies: you may only need to look at some things once a year, but others much more frequently. Hence the need for documented schedules.

(3) On a large layout, look to what you can automate. Jigs for hand laying trackwork are just one example. I am a lifetime techno-nerd, so I make heavy use of computers and sensors to run diagnostics of many kinds. For instance, I have a multi-car cleaning train that does a pretty good job, and I have a computer program that manages track coverage with it, with a companion program to remind me of the stub tracks (and other tracks the cleaning train can't cover) that are (over)due for some personal attention. I have also developed (well, am continuing to evolve) an automated track inspection system built into a couple of 60-foot baggage cars. The sensors available today are incredibly compact and powerful, and with the right software can do an astonishing job of picking up irregularities in the track from simple mechanical motion and basic electrical sensing. No, I have NOT tried to do this with lasers, thank you for asking! But consider for a moment what's built into a typical smart phone today, and that's not a big package.

Yes, my layout is too large for me, but I am stubborn, and get so much fun out of it that I am probably addicted. And I can always dive into the software to try and improve my life on the railroad, an activity which I find just as pleasurable, as well as being complementary to the model railroading.

Remember, "just because you can" is neither a good nor sufficient reason for anything. But, as has been said in other contexts, size has a quality all its own. If you really want a big layout, go for it.

OrlandoQ

Very Apropos

Your article raised one question for me.

I'm not planning to build a large layout.  My space is limited to a 7 foot by 9 foot "L" shaped space on two walls of a spare bedroom.  It will be a switching layout.  My plan was to use either Joe's "Poor Man's Jig Built Turnouts" or to buy the kits from the Proto 87 shops that are built to the same pattern except using Proto 87 frog castings.  I noticed in your article that you said that if the jigs had been available at the time that you would have used the commercial jigs to build your turnouts.  Why?  What is the advantage of commercial jigs, like Fastracks over the method that you used?

the kits from the Proto 87 shops

  For a small switching layout I'd go with proto 87 . You'll have more time to spend on each phase so the speed of building turnouts won't matter too much. Proto 87 will let you build exactly to scale when it comes to things around the rails and wheels, flangeways, point spread, loco wheelbase,brake shoes, etc. For something small I'd also use sergent couplers and build lots of "it's a model?" cars and locos :> )   Building to fine scale makes a small layout more desirable than a large layout because it can be built to a higher standard in less time......DaveB

I think I will need 13 -14 turnouts.

I think I will need 13 perhaps 14 turnouts for the entire layout.  I am still debating with myself whether I want to go entirely fine scale or just go with NMRA standards for the layout.  Most of the equipment that I have now has Kaddee couplers.  I think I want to switch over to Sergents once the track is down and the layout is operational. 

go entirely fine scale or just go with NMRA standards

     If you are worried about the operations I wouldn't , I tested some Proto 87 cars on 90 foot scale radius Harlem Transfer loop track and they ran fine. The other problem is the cost of P87 wheels and sergent couplers which means one would have to have less cars for the amount of money spent but for a small layout this likely wouldn't matter as much. Most of us have twice as many cars as we need so spend more on each car and have half as many better looking cars might be a good trade off? Don't build a proto 87 car unless you want to proceed that way because once you see one you will think the regular wheels look way too fat :> )  I'm not going with P87 for my new HO layout because it's fairly large and needs a lot of cars to fill it up but if the wheels cost the same I'd certainly make the switch .........DaveB 

Proto:87 for small layouts

Of course I agree that Proto:87 is the way to go for a small layout ( see my own blog).  However, I should caution you, Russ, you want to be careful about that L shape.  Proto:87 demands broad-radius curves, and so, if you think you're going to get away with an 18" radius to keep the centre of the room free for beds or desks, you need to try out the equipment you're planning to operate.  A good rule of thumb from the P4 people (who have way more history than P87) is that you take the expected minimum radius and multiply it by 1.5.

Let us know how you get on!

Rene'

Why jig-built turnouts over commercial turnouts?

Why do I prefer jig-built turnouts over commercial turnouts?

Long story. The short version is that no commercial HO turnout today follows the NMRA specs for turnouts exactly. If you take your HO NMRA gauge to any commercial turnout you will find they are all off, especially on the frog check gauge with the guard rails. How can you expect turnouts to work flawlessly if they don't match the specs?

Because the turnouts are all off, then making sure the wheels are all in gauge won't solve all your derailment problems. The solution is to make sure the turnouts are in spec as well.

The NMRA takes some share of the blame for commercial turnouts being off, because they feel their specs have been confusing and poorly expressed, making it hard for mass manufacturing to know what tolerances to set to meet the specs. The NMRA is taking steps to make their specs easier to understand and use.

Meanwhile, the latest crop of jig-built methods follow the specs, meaning that Fast Tracks, for example, has an NMRA seal for their turnout jigs being in 100% compliance, and turnouts properly built with their jigs will be in spec.

The Central Valley ties strips also yield a turnout that's in spec.

99% of your derailments will happen at turnouts. So if you get turnouts that are in spec, keeping your wheel gauge to spec now will yield the most consistent performance, which means fewer derailments at turnouts.

Yes, you can also handlay turnouts without a jig, but the fastest and most consistent results will come from learning to use a jig. So I'm slowly replacing the worst performing of my commercial turnouts with jig-built.

Thanks for the answer Joe, but I think you mised the question

I'm not planning to use commercial turnouts at all.  The question is whether to invest in Fastrack jigs, or do your "Poor Man's Jig Built Turnouts" or use the Proto 87 kits that are based on your jig built turnouts with Proto 87 Stores frog castings.   You mentioned in the article that you would have used the jig built turnouts if they had been available.  I was wondering what if any is the advantage of the jig built turnout as opposed to your version using the Central Valley tie strips?