I was hugely influenced by large peninsula style American layouts with multiple operators in my younger days. Layouts where an operator would despatch a train down the line to another guy. The late Peter Denny's Buckingham Branch being a supreme example, and it probably influenced me more than any layout.

I therefore built my own layout along those lines, but with the onset of  old age, am beginning to realise it will probably never get finished. 

Put it this way - I enjoy looking at layouts of all kinds, but for my private use, if I was given the choice between a 2mm FS totally accurate representation of the GWR Upper Lowerton Branch Line as it was on a mildly warm summer Sunday in 1936 or 1956 with enough stock to work the appropriate timetable, or a 1970s Lima/Farish/Minitrix layout which goes up and down and round and round in mildly implausible ways, I'd go for the latter.

On the whole I like layouts which are interesting, plausible and have character, they don't necessarily need to be ultra-realistic, but please don't have that Lima AL6 hauling a rake of Minitrix Gresley teaks.

I think character is the key word. 

I like layouts with some water in them, a harbour, seashore, river or the seaside.

For personal use I'd like quite a large mainline layout I can run scale length trains on, with a mix of passenger and freight services. Always fond of seeing such layouts with either a large complex depot and shunting yard, or large station. I'm not fond of visible roundy-round layouts as it takes away a sense of realism for me, although there's an easy fix there by having a chunk of the loop disappear behind a back scene. Its nice to see layouts that seem to edge into a built up open area but still make use of large open country side. A good eye for detail can really transform a layout into something special, Everard Junction, although not an N-guage layout, is a great example on youtube. Not an era I'm all that fond of and yet I keep watching his videos because its not only interesting to see how the layout is progressing but a great deal of care has gone into all the little details, without creating any clutter.

I agree with what Bealman posted, character being the key word. The best layouts I've seen usually have something special to them, a center piece if you will. For some its a finely crafted bridge structure, others a detailed station building with impressive architecture etc. Even kit bashing something from off the shelf to make it a little more unique can help a layout stand out.

I like to see the railway fitting into the landscape. Too many layouts in all scales start with track laid on a flat baseboard and then have scenery added. A layout built on open baseboards where the land around the railway gently sweeps up and down both above and below track height always does it for me.

I think I like any layout that demonstrates creativity and craftsmanship. Less about the degree of skill, but more the actual effort made by the modeller to create something unique to themselves.

To give you an idea of what doesn't impress me, I'd suggest 'Crossfields'. Not saying that it isn't attractive; it is, and stunningly evocative of the grimy reality of BR blue diesels as I remember them. But it works because of how much effort Mercig Studios has put into weathering the rolling stock and locomotives. These are individually impressive artworks, but because they're bought in by a layout owner with very deep pockets they don't really tell me anything about the modeller beyond his wealth. Call it 'chequebook modelling' if you like. The problem is that the scenics are, by contrast, relatively straightforward reworkings of Metcalfe kits (albeit rather cleverly done) so don't really impress in the same way as the Mercig-weathered models.

On the other hand, 'Frankland' is an example of a layout I like a lot. The rolling stock includes a lot of handcrafted stock, and the scenics are simply awesome, both authentic and unique in style and intent. You know exactly what the modeller is trying to evoke when you look at it, and the depth and quality of the scenics complements the rolling stocks beautifully.

There are lots of layouts on this forum I could gush over. But the key thing for me is that I'm looking at something that came out of the mind of the modeller rather than slapped together with off-the-peg items. As I say, the actual "quality" is a bit less important.

In fact I'd suggest people remind themselves of two layouts in particular, 'Madder Valley' and 'Heckmondwicke'. 'Madder Valley' sprang out of the mind of John Ahern and isn't technically accurate in any meaningful sense. It's a totally invented place with a made-up railway company using all sorts of oddball rolling stock. It's Rule #1 personified. But by gum it's got a lot of character, and despite the basic materials used, it's a layout to be savoured like a fine wine. 'Heckmondwicke' is at the opposite end of the spectrum for me. It's a layout produced by committee to make a point about P4/S4 standards, and everything was made to be as technically precise and realistic as possible. Yet it's very boring to look at, and even in the 1980s, when I would read articles about it in 'Railway Modeller', it impressed rather than inspired.

Cheers, NeMo

One that works 

A small shunting layout is what I prefer at home as I can have it out and have a play, as I only have a small house. However at exhibitions I do like to see large roundy-roundy layouts with full or decent length trains, if they can incorperate a shunting yard or depot, then it's even better.

I am a firm believer with exhibitions, in the keeping it right era and area. I have often walked away from layouts running as rule 1, as no matter how good the layout is, seeing a scotrail, FGW, Chiltern, Northern, London Midland and Anglia One liveried DMU's all sat in the station wound me up. As does seeing a steam hauled pick up freight, running past a MGR Hopper train hauled by a class 70. It makes them more toy like. I have no problem with doing this at home, but keep it matching at shows.

I have recently been talked (read bullied) in to building a FreeMo module. I was invited by a mate to come down to his HO group meeting. They were building their modules up and it turned into a 45ft long run with plenty of shunting (or switching - kept getting told off for that one). Was great fun and all run off our mobiles but not using the Z21 system.

I have got 6 weeks to get a 12ftx2ft n gauge module to an electrically complete stage ready for a show and then 2 weeks later the 8ftx18inch HO module to the same standard. Going to be a busy few weeks!

Alistair