Skip to main content

Hi Everyone,

We are building (plans are with the county right now for approval) an addition to our house and once it's completed (??!) I will have some space (not a lot) for a small O27 layout.  After looking at some pictures of small layouts on the internet, and of layouts in general in OGR magazine, I came up with the following dog bone plan in the pic here.  It's 9'4" (112") wide and 3'4" (40") deep.  I used the free version of Anyrail software to design it, and over the past year or so I've been buying everything I need; I think I've got everything now except for just the space to start putting it together.  Track is solid rail MTH RealTrax because after testing it against hollow rail and Lionel FastTrack, the solid rail RealTrax was noticeably less noisy than the other two.  Also, MTH RealTrax O31 curves are in reality about O27 and so take up slightly less space than FastTrack.  The buildings are all MTH and are shown to scale, but limitations of my ability using the Anyrail software make them seem like they take up too much space for the road and track.  When I did a dry-run with the actual track and buildings all laid out together, everything fit all right and the road is at least 7" wide almost everywhere.  The two sidings will be separate blocks.  The turnouts are O42 and so are a few curves.  Except for a couple of O82 curves at the top of the plan, all the other curves are O31.  The track with black rectangles in the middle are operating tracks.  The rectangles on the road represent cars, and (hard to see) on the track -  stretching from just above the level crossing to "Apt. #1" - is an outline of a steam engine hauled passenger train with 6 coaches to help provide a sense of scale.

I'm finally pretty happy with the design but I would certainly be happy to hear constructive criticism about it.

Matt

O Gauge Layout Final

Attachments

Images (1)
  • O Gauge Layout Final
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

It is a simple plan. But, I think in the long run you will enjoy the large amounts of space you left for scenery and structures. Too many small plans cram in as much track as possible and those get boring after awhile. Most of us enjoy building our trains just as much as running them, and having them nice to look at (because of the scenery) is a plus, and I think you will enjoy your layout.

@BenLMaggi posted:

It is a simple plan. But, I think in the long run you will enjoy the large amounts of space you left for scenery and structures. Too many small plans cram in as much track as possible and those get boring after awhile. Most of us enjoy building our trains just as much as running them, and having them nice to look at (because of the scenery) is a plus, and I think you will enjoy your layout.

@M. Tyler - I agree with @BenLMaggi that leaving space for scenery and structures will pay off more for you in the long run than the "spaghetti bowl of track" approach some people adopt for their layouts.

On my last layout I adapted a practice from the Victory Garden book call "one square foot gardening" to create "one square foot scenery scenes".  The Victory Garden book discusses how to maximize your gardening space by planting different vegetables or fruits in each square foot.  With "one square foot scenery scenes", as I call it, different distinct themes or situations are used.  Here are two examples from my last layout (6 X 15 feet) to give you some ideas for your layout:

The "bark park" shown below allowed use of some small "real estate" between some buildings and a diner.

Its the new bark park next to the pet store

The "railfan camp" between the tracks, a beacon tower and the layout room's south wall made use of some of otherwise unusable space.

Railfans Camped Out Next to Tracks [847x1024)

I hope this info helps.

Attachments

Images (2)
  • Its the new bark park next to the pet store
  • Railfans Camped Out Next to Tracks (847x1024)
Last edited by Pat Shediack

A simple track plan as the basis for a small layout has its charm, but one loop of track may soon become monotonous.  Consider creating a reversing loop by extending track from the loop to the TUNNEL and HILL area.  You'd likely have to give up that scenic feature for a reversing loop. If you prefer to keep those scenic areas and forego a reversing loop, carry on. After all, it's your layout!

Another consideration ... for more train activity, add a second layer.

Just saying ...

Mike Mottler         LCCA 12394

Add Reply

Post
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

AN OGR FORUM CHARTER SPONSOR

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×