My Dilemma

[dannyboy]

I want to build a new layout to primarily use with my 'Burlington Northern' rolling stock, (so I have quite a few UK outline stock to dispose of). The plan is that the new layout will be on two levels, the higher level being a 'roundy roundy' trip through the mountains, so there will be tunnels and bridges. It will be DC powered only.

The second level will, probably, be at ground level and incorporate a station and a maintenance depot. It will also be a 'roundy roundy', probably dual track, but will have various sidings incorporated into the design. The power for this level will be both DC and DCC depending on what locomotives are in use at a particular time, as I have quite a few of both DC and DCC locomotives.

So, to the dilemma. I have a space I can use that is approximately 8 feet in length, but only 2 feet in depth. The space is a atop a set of homemade cupboards with a top made of 4" x ½" timber, so would only need a thin covering on top. As I would be starting from scratch, all trackwork/switches etc., would need to be bought.  Another option is to use the space that Averingcliffe currently uses – this is approximately 12 feet x 2 feet 6 inch. But of course, I would need to dismantle Averingcliffe.  . The advantage with this option is that I already have a lot of track, especially points, (all Kato Unitrack), I have lots of switches and wire that I could re-use, so saving a fair chunk of money and the support framework is already in place, as it is for the first option. Plus, another great advantage of doing a second layout, wherever and however I do it, is the amount of knowledge I have picked up from some excellent people on this forum.  all.

A lot of work has gone into constructing Averingcliffe over the last five years, (in fact it was 27th January 2016 when I started making the first bits of framework). On the one hand, (sentimentality), I want to keep Averingcliffe, but on the other, practical side, it makes more sense to replace Averingcliffe. Plus of course, I can only operate one layout at a time. 

At the moment, I am only toying with ideas, but would be interested in hearing what other members think.

[Dorsetmike]

2' depth is somewhat minimal, can you extend it at all? Are the cupboards fixed to the wall or could they be brought forward a few inches  and the gap filled with another piece of 4"x1/2" and maybe another piece at the front that would give you 2'8" and gets you away from radius 1 & 2 curves. Maybe even modify the cupboards, storage space is always useful.

[Bealman]

That is a tricky one. I'm faced with a similar dilemma myself. There a lot of things wrong with my old layout, but I can't bring meself to rip it up.

I think your idea of building a second layout is probably the best, assuming you have the space, which apparently you have.

However, it'll be interesting to see what others think.... hopefully you won't end up even more confused! 

[zwilnik]

There is a school of thought, of which I am a subscriber, that the best art is temporary art. In that you remember a beautiful piece of art as being a lot more wonderful after it's gone than if you're able to keep going back and looking at it and get bored of it or nit pick it.

Having said that, each time I've had to take previous layouts apart and start again has usually been forced by house moves (or downsizing of allowed layout space), but I do remember them as being particularly excellent layouts in all ways, especially now nobody can actually see them and notice how bad the running quality was

I have managed to recycle quite a bit of scenery and components from each build (I still have a section from my first layout ready to drop into the new one). I do regret not documenting them more though. So if you do decide to scrap Averingcliff and reboot, take lots of pictures and video first! Also take notes of any running issues that you can design out of the new one

[AlexanderJesse]

Arguments for keeping your old layout are
- in case of "need" (eg. blocked creativity) you can fall bac to the old layout and "play" a bit. Just to get you charged up again for tackling the new layout again.
- you can use the old layout to show a potential buyer of "disposable" rolling stock how it runs, for example using zoom.

I would try to keep the old one at least until the first roundy on the new one is ready to take over.


For the size.
Two yards can be a challenge for modern american rolling stock. Consider adding some depth at the ends of the layouts area to allow for a larger turn-radius. 2 feet of depth allows for a max radius of 9 inches... for those huge locos and modern trailers this might be challenging.

[Webbo]

An interesting dilemma, David

I agree that a 2' width is a bit tight for a roundy roundy especially considering the generally longer American rolling stock and locomotives. Would you consider an end-to-end second layout and keep Averingcliffe for roundy-roundy operations?

Webbo

[port perran]

Averingliffe is a lovely layout and I'd hate to see it go.
However, what is your main interest?
Is it running trains or building layouts?
As others have said, 2ft in width is very limiting so, is it better to start completely afresh with a bigger layout.
You will still remember Averingcliffe and you have lots of photos plus you will have learned a lot from building it.
I found it hard to break up my Port Perran layout but it's gone now (but not forgotten).
The decision is, of course, yours and yours alone.
Cheers
Martin

[keithbythe sea]

I'm currently in the same situation David. Sonmel 2 got an airing on the planning thread a couple of months ago. The boss suggested that Sonmel 1 could be mothballed in the garage roof rather than be dismantled. I then found that both timber and track for the new layout were difficult to obtain. So work continues on Sonmel 1  .

I suspect that I'm currently not ready to fully let go of Sonmel 1. If I try hard I could probably get the timber and track for a new build.

So what I'm trying to say is, sounds like the best solution for you is to replace Averingcliffe, but are you ready for that? Can you put it into store anywhere? Is 2 feet depth really enough for a US layout?

There, "simples". 

[Nbodger]

David,

Are you really limited to a 2' width, could you not increase by making a multi board layout in this case two boards. When jointed together and in use the second board could be supported on folding legs and for storage stack one above the other with a support frame of some description. For lifting purposes a lightweight construction type should be considered.

You could always have a large layout on a pulley system over the dining room table, which can be lowered for use, just like my father in law did, however it was soon forced into being moved to the loft by management

Mike H 

[Train Waiting]

David; I suggest you keep Averingcliffe.  It is a truly lovely layout and you can have fun playing with it when you build the new layout.  Once the new layout is operational, you will then be able to run either British or US outline according to whatever takes your fancy.  I think that would be very agreeable.

I am fairly relaxed about the two feet width, although another inch or two would make all the difference.  My latest two layouts are two feet wide.  You have a great advantage with your BNSF prototype.  Most route miles of the CB&Q, NP and GN were single track.  That means you can use No. 2 equivalent radii - with my British-outline double track layouts, I had to use No. 1 radius for the Down line.  As my locomotive fleet is mostly Union Mills, that does not cause any difficulty.  I tried my four British diesels and they run round both loops although the EE 'Type 4' 1Co-Co1 looked most peculiar on the No. 1 radius Down line.  The little Bo-Bo locomotives looked fine on both the Up and Down lines - BNSF had a lot of four axle units in its early days. 

I suggest you go ahead with Jim Hill-type confidence and build your new BNSF layout, keeping us abreast of developments and, please, keep the Averingcliffe posts coming as well.

With all best wishes.

John   

[Newportnobby]

My thinking is along exactly the same lines (sorry) as John in that 2ft is plenty wide enough for a single track using radius 2 curves. I know you mentioned dual track but you could have the end curve emerging from the base of the mountain and opening out into a yard with passing loop(s).
Use the mountain as the basis for both base level and high level ovals but the upper one could be a figure of eight rising and falling as you wish. Just my thoughts.
Or maybe do the new layout in Z gauge

[weave]

Hi David,

A dilemma indeed. I'll keep it to one question so far and that is, forgetting the layout practicality as such, would you miss running UK trains if you just went American? The scenery would obviously be different and would look odd if you tried to run both.

I'm lucky in that Izaro runs both French and Spanish trains but if I modelled Spain but had say some Austrian trains which I wanted to model, I don't think I could destroy the Spanish layout to make an Austrian one. So, back to the original question and we can take it from there  .

Cheers, weave 

[dannyboy]

@Dorsetmike  @Bealman  @zwilnik  @AlexanderJesse @Webbo @port perran @keithbythe sea @Nbodger @Train Waiting @Newportnobby @weave
My thanks to you all for the replies.  . I am nowhere near being convinced one way or t'other, but there have been some nice comments regarding Averingcliffe. Mooching about today, I have come across another area, about 4 foot by 3 feet that I could use, so the problem/solution has not been helped.  . One kind member, (you know who you are), has informed me that he has some spare Unitrack, so that would be a help if I decided to keep Averingcliffe and build a second layout. I can not do much more than think and plan for the time being, as I do not have enough materials in the house to start a build and any wood suppliers round about are shut. (Apparently building a train layout is not classed as 'essential'  ).
But, again,  for your thoughts. 

[zwilnik]

One other though. Can Averingcliffe be 'shrunk' (ie keep the best bits but reduce the overall footprint of the layout) so it can fit in one of the lesser spaces? That way you've got its big space for the new one but still keep to keep the core of Averingcliffe.

[dannyboy]

@zwilnik
Now that is what you call 'lateral thinking' AND 'thinking outside the box' simis sumalt simal at the same time! I could say "genius", but I won't. But it is a good idea - okay then, it's a brilliant idea!