Update on Designing the 4th Subdivision

 

Most recent version of the 4th Division

In planning for the larger railroad, intended to fill two thirds of the basement, I have been following some of the guidelines in Lance Mindheim's book, How to Design a Model Railroad, as I described in a post last November. In addition to the three plans mentioned in that post, I worked out three or four others (each of them had some problems) utilizing modules from my attic layout in Meadville before coming up with this final (?) version. 

In addition to using some of the previous modules or sections, I want to hit some operational and visual goals. While I expect to be just running by myself most of the time, I also want to be able to match at least the minimum requirements for the AP operations (Chief Dispatcher) certificate and be able to hold operations sessions with a few others in case I find myself leaning in either of those directions. I also know that for me to be happy with my model railroad, I will want it to appear realistic, like a miniature world, approaching the look of a three dimensional painting.    

Existing modules to incorporate

Keeping in mind that while this planning is for the entire railroad, I intend to follow Joe Fugate's TOMA (The One Module Approach) suggestion of building one or two sections to completion and operate with temporary staging before adding additional sections. The town of Nooksack on the benchwork footprint plan at the beginning of this post is one of the existing modules as is the trestle scene module that we moved from our former home. While I may want to lengthen the passing track, those modules should go back together well. Unless I make a huge shift in my thinking, making some minor adjustments to those two modules and getting them under way will be the beginning of the 4th Subdivision v.2.

In Mindheim's book, he suggests reviewing several considerations before moving from the footprint and route stage to overlaying the final schematic and track plan. Generally following from his prompt questions, here are some of my thoughts based on this final version.

• While I might want some kind of continuous run possibility, this is essentially a point to point design. The staging/Ferndale area is not developed at this point, but my unplanned concept is for a combination of fiddle yard staging and a direct run through. If practicable I may add continuous running here with "the blob" as the other end, but if it doesn't work out, that is okay as it won't interfere with my operations plan. 
• For the most part, this design contains easy access without lift-outs or duckunders, and it has fairly open aisle-ways. Ferndale staging is the main exception to this as it is hidden from the main layout, and the access to it requires walking around into the utility area. The dead end aisle with both Carnation Co. and Curtis has the potential to become crowded with multiple operators, and the entrance to it is below my desired four foot aisle-ways. It is more spacious than the rejected plans though.
• The turn-back blob at a five foot width will allow for maintaining my curve radius minimum of 24." The reach-in distances are all quite manageable. Both of these were issues in previous design attempts. 
• One area of concern is having suitable scenic or negative space between the more intensive secondary track elements. Particularly if I plan on somewhat longer train lengths, I want to avoid trains just running from one built up area directly into another with the locomotive in one and the caboose still in another. 

While I don't have all the areas and trackwork thoroughly planed here, I am confident that I can identify any minor changes in the Nooksack modules needed to move forward, start those changes, and begin some room prep.