What do you like best
- Thread starter shamus
- Start date
I prefer continuous, but would also like the diversity of a point-to-point. Anyway, isn't taking a set out of the yards, round the continuous a few times, then into the yards again, a sorta point-to-point anyway??? All you need is another siding or two on the other side of the layout.
Would this pass as point-to-point?
I like to incorporate point-to-point in a continuous layout, but continuous is my preference.
Would this pass as point-to-point?
I like to incorporate point-to-point in a continuous layout, but continuous is my preference.
I definitely prefer point to point as that is far more realistic. I know, not everyone has the space so you compromise as I have done in the past. I just don't like seeing trains run around unless the trackplan and scenery work together to make it feel the the train is actualy going somewhere. Hard to do well I know.
I will eventually have both, I presently have a continous run but with logging line eventually going in it will be to the log pick up area then to the mill ( point to point) it can also use on the continous loop.
Ron.
Ron.
This may not be to the point, but having a small John Allen type switching layout I'd love to just kick back throttle up and watch a whole train speeding through the wide open spaces.
I guess after the newness wore off i'd say a combination of both would be what i'd prefer.
t.
I guess after the newness wore off i'd say a combination of both would be what i'd prefer.
t.
I agree with Chessie, I like to watch the trains run while I work on other aspects of the layout or perform switching operations. I do however like to break up the loop so it is not obviously a circle.
I don't have a choice -- my space doesn't allow for turnback loops and the domestic authorities won't let me complete the loop by building across the door to the laundry room.
It was my original choice -- I probably wouldn't mind a continuous loop somewhere for running in or visitors.
It was my original choice -- I probably wouldn't mind a continuous loop somewhere for running in or visitors.
For me it's both. At my clubs layout you can do both. Plus, it allows for "Real World" Ops. You know... the local runs along picking things up and dropping off ; and needs to move its butt so the Express to where ever don't run it over. Or the Express has to sit 'cause the local broke down and is clogging the main. Stuff like that.
My sense of "How Things Ought To Be" tells me that I should have point-to-point. My sense of "How Things Really Are" tells me that I had better have a continuous loop or at least some provision for continuous running because I really don't know squat about operations and train movements. So I'm trying to incorporate both schemes into my latest track planning adventures.
I think what will eventually win out will be a plan that has the CM&S in a continuous run scheme and the OVT&L in a point-to-point. The two lines will interchange at the OVT&L's mill site or somewhere near it.
I think what will eventually win out will be a plan that has the CM&S in a continuous run scheme and the OVT&L in a point-to-point. The two lines will interchange at the OVT&L's mill site or somewhere near it.
I prefer continuous. I like to be able to turn my train on and watch it go around. I agree with the point to point being more realistic, but I don't really have a very good system of moving things from point to point. So for now, I will just stick with my continuous layout.
I like 'em both. Sometimes it's fun to go out and do a bunch of switchin', and other times I just like to 'let 'em run.'
If you can let your imagination drive your action, a continuous loop can be a point-to-point. That is what I am doing with my Engleton & Western. Like Casey, my knowledge of how a railroad operates is limited to what I read in Model Railroader and maybe one or two of the Kalmbach books. But I can take a train out of the yard and send it to St Louis in the Staging area and bring a train out of staging from Charleston, WVA to run around a loop a couple times before ending up in the yard to be broken down and reassembled for a local to the branch loop. Aren't we all kind of long in the dreaming and imagination bit anyway? 
I'm a looper. But I think some P-P adds reality. I'm in it for the modeling; right now operations sounds too much like work to me. But when it's all said and done, when there is no more modeling to be done (ya right!) perhaps I will be glad I incororated some P-P to do and I'll then learn ops. While working on a layout, I like to have a train running around unattended, something to look out for I voted combo.
I voted combo.
I understand the concerns about realistic operating. A friend of mine who has been a railroad modeller for many years, got offered a job with the Eastern Shores short line railroad. He has worked his way up through different levels and is currently a conductor. What he tells me that now with full scale experience, he operates his model railroad very differently. I will have to go and visit him soon to see just how he does it now.
I would like point to point operations but sometimes I would also like to just sit back and watch the trains run. Therefore I like a combination.
Why I Like BOTH...
Like Jon-O, I voted "combo".
Why? Well, it's soooooo much easier to knock the darned things onto the floor while working on the layout if they're running through your work area. That way, I don't have to stop what I'm doing, put things down, get up, walk all the way over to the other side of the layout JUST to pitch a train onto the floor. Why make things difficult?
Okay, enough about my innate clumsiness. I like to work with trains running, and when purposely running trains, I enjoy switching. My kids want to watch them go around and around.
When more space permits, I would like to have a run-through line that passes over the top of the workbench...something like a shelf with a track or two, maybe a scenicked "shadow-box", or something so that while working on some tedious workbench chore, a train will pass by every now and then. Maybe even fancier, a photocell thingy could announce the arrival of said train with a whistle...
Am I way off topic? If so, I'm sorry, but this is something I've always thought about, and it does (kind of) fit into a continuous-run idea.
Like Jon-O, I voted "combo".
Why? Well, it's soooooo much easier to knock the darned things onto the floor while working on the layout if they're running through your work area. That way, I don't have to stop what I'm doing, put things down, get up, walk all the way over to the other side of the layout JUST to pitch a train onto the floor. Why make things difficult?
Okay, enough about my innate clumsiness.
I like to work with trains running, and when purposely running trains, I enjoy switching. My kids want to watch them go around and around.When more space permits, I would like to have a run-through line that passes over the top of the workbench...something like a shelf with a track or two, maybe a scenicked "shadow-box", or something so that while working on some tedious workbench chore, a train will pass by every now and then. Maybe even fancier, a photocell thingy could announce the arrival of said train with a whistle...
Am I way off topic? If so, I'm sorry, but this is something I've always thought about, and it does (kind of) fit into a continuous-run idea.
At first I couldn't decide between "continuous" and "combination." I finally voted for the combo option.
But there are a couple of reasons why "continuous" would be a good choice for me. First, I'm a lone wolf modeler. I don't personally know another model railroader in my community. (In fact, it's possible I'm the only one in my town. I've never run into anyone else who has mentioned the hobby.) So any train running I do is always solitary.
Second, I honestly know very little about real operations and switching. Designing a layout for that sort of activity would pretty much be wasted on me.
Even so, I voted "combination" simply because everything I stated above could change at some point in the future.
Some time back, at RR-L, PapaSmurf, Brakie, Moss-Lake, and some others had a really good layout design/ops forum going. I was beginning to learn something about the whole subject from them. It's a shame all of that info is lost now.
But there are a couple of reasons why "continuous" would be a good choice for me. First, I'm a lone wolf modeler. I don't personally know another model railroader in my community. (In fact, it's possible I'm the only one in my town. I've never run into anyone else who has mentioned the hobby.) So any train running I do is always solitary.
Second, I honestly know very little about real operations and switching. Designing a layout for that sort of activity would pretty much be wasted on me.
Even so, I voted "combination" simply because everything I stated above could change at some point in the future.
Some time back, at RR-L, PapaSmurf, Brakie, Moss-Lake, and some others had a really good layout design/ops forum going. I was beginning to learn something about the whole subject from them. It's a shame all of that info is lost now.
Shamus
I couldn't vote because you left out one important option: neither.
My layout is 3 x 4, has a straight run of track along the back (coming from nowhere and going nowhere) and a similar one at the front for trolleys. There's no track wiring in place because a) I don't have a clue how to do it and b) what's the point of running a train a distance of 4 feet and then watching it crash to the floor?
Now, before you decide that this has got to be the dumbest layout plan ever (oh c'mon admit the thought crossed your mind) I just want to say that it started off as an excuse to play with some building kits, and then kind of grew from there into a diorama. Of course I needed some track for realism, then I wanted to stick in a plate girder bridge I liked the look of. The next thing I knew I was buying a loco to cross that bridge and of course it had to be pulling some boxcars. Then some tank cars caught my eye and as they seemed to fit, I bought a couple.
You see where I'm going with this? The damn hobby just kinda snuck up on me! Now I'm thinking this diorama is really just a module, and all I need are 2 more modules, one on either end with a turnaround for the 2 sets of track and a crash course in wiring. Hmmmmm.
Cheers
Val
I couldn't vote because you left out one important option: neither.
My layout is 3 x 4, has a straight run of track along the back (coming from nowhere and going nowhere) and a similar one at the front for trolleys. There's no track wiring in place because a) I don't have a clue how to do it and b) what's the point of running a train a distance of 4 feet and then watching it crash to the floor?
Now, before you decide that this has got to be the dumbest layout plan ever (oh c'mon admit the thought crossed your mind
) I just want to say that it started off as an excuse to play with some building kits, and then kind of grew from there into a diorama. Of course I needed some track for realism, then I wanted to stick in a plate girder bridge I liked the look of. The next thing I knew I was buying a loco to cross that bridge and of course it had to be pulling some boxcars. Then some tank cars caught my eye and as they seemed to fit, I bought a couple.You see where I'm going with this? The damn hobby just kinda snuck up on me! Now I'm thinking this diorama is really just a module, and all I need are 2 more modules, one on either end with a turnaround for the 2 sets of track and a crash course in wiring. Hmmmmm.
Cheers
Val
I like your idea Steve, makes sense to have a track coming to your workbench.
Val, the real benefit of this hobby is to do what you want and to spend time doing whatever brings you the most enjoyment. Sounds like you are having fun, I hope!
Val, the real benefit of this hobby is to do what you want and to spend time doing whatever brings you the most enjoyment. Sounds like you are having fun, I hope!