Idea in the works

[jkinosh]

This is something that I saw on a website that looked like an interesting design.

I believe that it is a model of the Keddie Wye

what does everybody think?

This is a drawing of what the Trackplan would be:

This is what the original looked like completed (on the site where I found it):

I would tell you more about the original, but I believe the original site was in swedish, and the google translator didn't do to well with it, and neither did a few of the others I tried, so the top drawing is me best interpretation.

Here is a link to the original site: http://members.chello.se/mj.n/

Please let me know if you think this would be feasable project for a first "real" Layout. Previous was a partially sceniced oval or track that came with me train.

Thanks for the help.

Jacob
train97

 

[Collyn]

I love that layout. It might be difficult for a begginer, though. I think it could be done but not in the same manner that one was built. I definitly would not have that drastic of elevation changes. You would be much better of if you used more user freindly things. The bench work was extreamly complicated. It would be best if you used things like the foam riseres woodland scenics sells. Just buy three times as much plaster cloth as you think you need. It all depends on the person. If you decide to build it I am sure the people at the gauge can walk you threw it.

 

[Triplex]

I can't say how easy or difficult that layout might be to build. I can say that I like the design. Wrapping a yard around an end curve works well for small layouts as long as track length is more important than number. The elevations really make the layout look larger, and the seemingly-unlikely scenery of a wye acros a canyon is entirely prototypical.

 

[jkinosh]

Thanks for the replys, I am thinking that this is going to be sort of a winter project, at least to get started on it. Now I just have to convince the other half to allow me the funding to do it.

Jacob

 

[Shooter]

It is definitely a great layout, a great result, and an inspired design.

Like all small layouts, this design does have some compromises. The curves are very sharp (I remember seeing pictures of the layout with cars on it, which really accentuates the tight curves), and some of those grades are quite steep. With a small layout, you can't help but make some compromises. The question is simply whether or not you can live with those particular compromises. I would be able to live with those compromises.

---jps

 

[ejen34]

I love switching, at first glance it wouldn't appear like there would be alot of opportunity for switching with few sidings etc, however I think this would be a good layout to work on :thumb:

 

[jkinosh]

I noticed that, but I believe that if I don't run overly long trains, I should be perfectly fine.

I liked this design because I would actually be able to allow the trains to just run, for the watching enjoyment.

Jacob

 

[fsm1000]

To be honest, I see it as a 6 month to a year project [accounting for work etc] and depends on your skills level. This would be a good transition to intermediate as it does not have a lot of expert things on it. Although as your skills improve you could easily add some. Like signals, lighting etc.

Anyhow, it looks like a great layout and I encourage you to give it a shot. Have fun.

 

[railohio]

Seems really complex to just go around in circles...

 

[RonP]

Great looking layout

 

[Will_annand]

Looks OK, but seems to serve no purpose....
There are only 2 sidings with NOTHING around them, no reason for them to be where they are.

With a round and round layout like that, I would think you would get bored quickly.

 

[Triplex]

I think what I and many other people like about this layout is its good, well-arranged scenery. It does lack buildings. I didn't realize how small it was. I thought it was closer to 4'x8'. That would, incidentally, be a good size for this plan, allowing minimum curves around 16" and more room for buildings, spurs, and anything else you may feel it's lacking.

 

[MasonJar]

I think it captures the prototype very well (covered in an MR issue a while ago). One concern that I would have is the trackwork in the upper left of the plan. The tight radius and steep grade to get the train from the "tunnel leg" of the wye to under the trestle may cause problems. I can't remember if it is prototypical either, but it might look funny, operations-wise. Your call though.

You might be able to reconfigure it so that the route would be different, but I see a lot of hidden loops under the table required to do this...

The prototype is basically a yard in the middle of nowhere, so if you are happy operating trains in a yard only, and/or watching trains go in circles, and/or like doing scenery, then I would say it is a great choice.

Andrew

 

[shaygetz]

I like it, operations would be limited to scheduled thru runs with an occasional drop/pickup but would certainly be enjoyable, especially with time penalties, speed limits and superior/inferior runs. Carpentry would not be too difficult for someone handy with wood and can plan his cuts. Measure twice, cut once:thumb: The bridges present a challenge, even for an experienced modeler but nothing that hasn't been covered in a thousand issues of MR and RMC over the years. The curves can be broadened somewhat where necessary with more planning, this will help with the grade, too. Certainly a much better first layout choice than the room and basement filling future Plywood Pacifics that show up from time to time.

 

[CCT70]

I LOVE it, but I'm biased, I model the WP and am part of the WP railroad Museum in Portola. sign1

Tom