It's in Color Now

Well, it took awhile to translate the line drawing into a color layout plan but I finally finished it. The style is taken from MR and seeing how long it took to make this I have a definitely appreciation for the amount of time their graphic artists must have to put in on the big layouts!



It really doesn't show anything new from the black and white version but still I think it gives a better impression of where I am going with it. BTW, if you click the image you'll get a larger version that should be clearer to see.

Next up will be to find some industries that represent the industries on my plan. Hopefully I can either take or find some good prototype photos.

Final designs

A number of drawings and even some forum critiques have helped to come up with what I believe to be the final design. However, I want to share the steps that it took me to get there.

To begin with I decided that 18" in depth and 6' in length as 2 sections, each 3', that would connect in the middle would be a good starting point and fit with my original limitations. I wanted some semblence of a main line, even if it was more implied than actual, some industries to switch and probably some type of interchange track.



This is Design 0. Actually there were many attempts before this but I'm going to share each candidate that for one reason or another I thought was "the one" and leave out all the failed attempts. Looking at this I envisioned a mailline (2nd track up), a spur to park cars, engines, etc. on at the bottom and a couple of industries at the top with a run around and an implied off track connection. In the final analysis there was probably not enough room on the right side spur for the run around to even fit an engine let alone a car and engine. Also, only the industry on the left would be able to have much in the way of a structure. The industry on the right would have to be just false flats.

So back to the drawing board....



Now for Design one I simplified the track and implied tha main line coming in about half way up. At the top are a couple of industries and another industry bottom left with a 2 track yard or interchange bottom right. it has more room for industries but there is no run around making it impossible to spot or pick up at the upper left hand industry.

So back to the drawing board...



Design 2 is where I started to think a bit differently. In this case the double main line is just for show with an implied curved interchange track just to the left of it. Room for 2 sizeable industries but again no run around and the spur is too small for an engine and a car.

So back to the drawing board... which, btw, I'm using the free software from Atlas to work up these designs. I haven't decided if I'm using Atlas track yet but for concepts and just trying things out it's pretty easy to work with. You can get it here.



Design 3 was another attempt to think outside the normal style. In this case I turned one of the sections 90 degrees to make a simple L design. Again, double main line (non operational), curve interchange track but like the rest the spurs are too short and there isn't really more than an industry or two to switch at best with the yet again problem of no run arounds.

So back to the drawing board...



Design 5 (I don't remember what I did with design 4... probably got frustrated with it and never saved it). Main line across the bottom with 3-4 industries. Spurs are large enough but I forgot the run around again so I can't actually switch all the industries.

So back to the drawing board...



Final 1. This design was, I thought the final design. The curved track is the interchange to the implied main line and I've got 3 and maybe even 4 industries. I was quite happy with this and posted to a discussion group for critique. Took about 5 minutes for them to rip it apart pointing out that again the top left corner would be inaccessible for spotting cars. Otherwise the design as is wasn't too bad. In case you hadn't noticed I changed to 6" squares on this drawing.

There is one other major problem with this layout and all of the previous ones. Remember earlier I said that it would be in two 3' pieces? Look at the dividing point for each of the previous designs. There are tracks going all over the place. It would be impossible to join these without pretty much ripping the track loose the first time I tried.

So back to the drawing board...



Final 2 is where I abandoned the original thinking of 2 - 3' sections and decided to experiment with 3 - 3' sections for an overall size of 18" x 9'. Suddenly things that were very difficult like run around and short stub tracks became much easier to do. I was even able to incorporate 3 industries and the mainline and interchange track too. I was quite happy but after mulling this one over for a few days I decided to try and tweak it a bit.

So, after my final design attempt...



I think we have a winner. Again 18" x 9' as 3 sections. Three industries and an engine shed or 4 industries and the engine just gets left outside when not in use. Double main line and an Interchange track. Stubs are big enough to actually operate and the division sections are between the silos/building and just to the right of the center industry. In both cases all tracks are 90 degrees to the joint so connecting and disconnect should be, relatively, easy.

The plan is the top left corner will be a building front with an outdoor loading crane if I do a flat car based industry or some type of chemical or ashphalt transfer point if I base it on tank cars. The top middle building is intended as an engine shed and servicing point. Basically just a cheap tin shed and a fuel tank, maybe some "spare parts" lying around. Think cheap and dirty. Finally the top right industry will be for hopper cars. Perhaps grain silos or plastic pellet silos. The lower left corner will be a warehouse with side loading and right next to it (or part of the same building) another side loading or perhaps inside loading facility. Box cars would probably be the only cars here. There will be a road that goes under the interchange and branch line tracks and essentially parallels the main line. Finally there may be a small, probably abandoned now, building by the crossing.

While studying this drawing I have mentally switched just about every possible combination from interchange to industry and back and have not found a problem. Everything seems to fit and operations seem a distinct probability with this design.

Next step is to formalize this drawing a bit for use in the next planning steps.

Found some good ideas

A lot of reading both print and online and I found a number of good ideas but nothing that was "The One". On Carl's web site mentioned in the last post I found this one



but it still isn't quite it either. You'll see why later. In general there were some good designs but they were too deep (24") or too long or too big or too.... Now long I could deal with as I could cut them in half or even thirds if necessary.

I think I'll try drawing some ideas myself and see if any are more appealing.

A bit of research

A few of the sources I've started to go through for track plans (or at least track plan ideas) include the HO HOGRR, the Model Railroader Track Plan database, Coffee Table Layouts and Carl's Micro/Small Layout Designs. I think Carl's site is probably going to be closest to what I am looking for although I'm not looking to build this into a shoebox either so perhaps expanding on some of the ideas presented there will be a reasonable compromise.

A few layout books I've gathered over the years include Small, Smart & Practical Track Plans from Iain Rice, Basic Model Railroad Track Plans: Small Starter Layouts You Can Build from Kent Johnson and 48 Top Notch Track Plans: From Model Railroader Magazine from Bob Hayden. All three have had possibilities in them however most are too large so I'll be looking for small sections or elements that might work in a smaller plan.

Making some decisions

Thinking over some of the questions I came up with I've decided that this will be located in the modern era. Diesels and probably somewhere in the 70s or 80s for a time frame. This will allow for some well used (i.e. weathered and rusty) older engines along with some more current equipment too. It does eliminate some of the newest (and larger) engines however this was never going to be a big enough layout to do them justice anyway. SD40's are probably the biggest I could consider with SWs and GPs being the more likely motive power choices.

While I am a fan of the IC/ICG (grew up near one of their lines that headed west through some of Chicago's suburbs) I am not going to specifically model this railroad. Ideally the layout will allow for multiple lines or at least the intersection of two lines allowing for a little more variety.

I used to model in N however my interest in weathering and detailing coupled with my not so young anymore eyes and hands mostly left me frustrated. Thanks to Ebay I was able to sell the N stuff at a fair price and picked up a few HO cars to see if it would be any easier. It was. Given that HO has the widest selection and is still easy for me to work with I think I'll stick with HO.

One of the stated goals of the PDPL is to be a functional layout. This means operating it. Round and round won't be good enough... there will have to be some switching involved too. The actual design is stil in progress but with some variety in switching I think a fairly urban setting is going to be best. A wilderness setting, to me, means pretty much single industries. Think Mining or Logging. Rural is probably going to be the same... Grain Silos. While Urban could easily see industries served by box cars, flats, tanks and hoppers all in a relatively small area.

For now the DC/DCC debate will be shelved. I like the idea of DCC but unless a design can accomodate multiple engines then it might be money spent that doesn't need to be as I have a perfectly fine DC power pack right now.

Track type (brand, code, hand laying, etc.) will be settled later too.

The last big requirement is portability. What is considered portable? Where am I going to take it? or put it? While I might go to train shows or other exhibits with it in the future that isn't part of the current plan. However, if it is portable then there is no reason it couldn't be taken somewhere. Fitting in the car means that it would probably have to be stackable and in sections no longer than 4 feet.

When I'm not using it, I plan on putting it away where the cats can't have their way with it. A readily available closet would give me about 4' in width and up to 5' in height and a little less than 2' in depth to work with.

So possible options include a single 4' x 20", a couple of 5' x 20" (stood on end in the closet when stored), three 4' x 20" sections, three 5' x 20", two or three 3' x 20", etc. Being able to take it somewhere in the car will have to be decided as that would eliminate the 5' options.

I guess it's time to try to find a plan (or create one) that fits into one of those size combinations. Essentially somewhere between 4' and 15' in length and 15"-20" in depth. With a limit of 3 sections they would have to be arranged in a triangle if I wanted continous running as 20"... maybe even stretched to 22" still results in less than an 11" radius curve. Short of using Track Mobiles as my motive power 11" is just not going to work for a continous layout.

Starting things off

Welcome to the PDPL Short Line... or PDPL for short.

What does PDPL stand for? Portable Diorama Photo Layout

How did I come up with that name? It really is just a acronym for a fictional railroad describing the purpose of this layout.

We currently don't live in a McMansion. We also have cats. Anyone with cats knows that they are curious and like to get involved with stuff. Things like model trains look like big mice to them and move quite nicely when whacked with a paw. Given the lack of a dedicated layout space and the fact that the cats will, at the very least, break a layout setup in a permanent fashion, a room sized or larger layout is out of the question.

So, something small, perhaps a layout that can be "put away" when I'm done with it sounds like the best choice.

I also enjoy detailing, custom painting and weathering engines and rolling stock. A layout large enough to display a few of these for some photos would be nice. Having the cars appear to be at a relavant industry helps to make the photo appear more realistic.

Finally, being able to actually run some trains on this layout... maybe in circles, maybe not. Perhaps just a switching layout. Whatever it turns out to be it should be useable.

With those goals in mind the list of other considerations is fairly long.

• What era will this layout represent?


• Is it to relect a specific railroad?


• What kind of rolling stock? Size? (short 40' or 89' or somewhere in the middle?)


• What scale? HO? N?


• Setting? Urban? Rural? Wilderness? Mixture?


• DC? DCC?


• Round and Round? Switching? Combination?


• Just how portable is portable? 4ft? 6ft? Perhaps something in multiple pieces?


• Hand laid track? Premade track?


• And many more...

I'm going to start off by researching existing track plans and seeing if anything fits. If not, perhaps elements of a number of them could be combined into a layout that does work for me.