Start again or expand?

[Allscales]

Hi All,

I'm in a quandary: I've been building my layout Gerlos, since about 2011. I'm slowly making progress, but now I face a key decision: Should I continue or scrap the whole lot and start again from scratch?

Allow me to explain....

Gerlos is an utter compromise, small engine shed, inaccessible fiddle yard, short loops... It measures 2.2m by 0.9m

The reason for this was that the original plan was based on the restriction of fitting into the study whilst leaving it usable as a study(/loco workshop).

That restriction will disappear over the summer as the loft is converted into a 6x3.6 m train room... Space the final frontier!

This opens up a whole new world of possibilities: loco depot, carriage storage roads and lastly a branch line... Trying to bolt this onto the current layout will be yet another compromise, and won't resolve any of the previous compromises...

I'm lucky in that because of various other pieces of building work progress has been slow so almost no scenery has yet been done, wood is wood: always re-usable... The track can all be recovered and re-used.

A big bonus is that I could go cross border and head from the Zillertal all the way to Landeck and Scuol Tarasp to give my RhB models a home as well.

What do you think?

[Andre Anderson]

Greetings,

If it was me I would scrap the original, if there is dissatisfaction with the compromises of the first you will not all of sudden wake up and go "Wow this is perfect now".  With more space come the ability to plan things out for example the staging (Fiddle) yards can be made both accessible and long enough to be usable.  If the RhB is standard gauge YES, nothing shows narrow gauge for the size that it is better than have both together!

Andre Anderson  :)
Portland Oregon USA

[theelliotts]

Andre

The RhB is metric gauge, however substantial narrow Gauge run as a standard, on the other hand there could be some SG at the Landeck end where there could be a direct junction with the SG. The RhB did plan a connection to Landeck but the first world war got in the way. Interesting in the space available.

David

[JulienW]

How about a compromise... no- hang on and let me explain.

Build a new layout in the new territory - 6x3.6 m sounds wonderful and I'm envious of the space! - but instead of scrapping it keep the smaller Gerlos as something to 'play' with whilst building the bigger one, and then re-build that (as a portable exhibition layout if it isn't one already).

[Allscales]

Hi All,

Thanks for the advice so far. Gerlos is currently 2.2 x 0.9 m and is a single sheet of MDF (one of the compromises), with solid wood bracing.

It is transportable, but is very much unfinished. The upper level (and approach ramps) have been cut (from a sinlge sheet of plywood!), but not fixed in place. It was when I started to fit it, that I noticed how constrained access would be.

As the main board is a single piece it requires three people to get it out of where it is now. Once it moves into its proper home it will require even more!

None of the track permanently fixed down now, it can all be safely lifted. I have another layout: Links

[John Atkinson]

Hi Friso

As you will realise, I'm getting back into things so do feel free to resume direct communication if you wish.

So far as this question is concerned, I think that you really already know the answer in yourself!

Gerlos Mark 1 has given you experience and hopefully also fun but it also has necessitated far more compromises than you clearly want, so why perpetuate them?  Redesign from scratch would be my advice. And if you fancy having an HOm/HOe connection with the Rh.B, well that's perf feasible and why not?  It's your personal chunk of model railway and "modeller's licence" has been invoked to justify far less rational ideas. Good luck whatever you decide.

John

[tedp]

As someone who built a sizeable layout over the years, I think I may qualify to give you some advice. Gerlos seems to be large and monolithic.

Filling a 6x3 metre loft with a completed layout will take you a lifetime, if you won't move house halfway in the process. Also, completing such an expanse of bare layout area can become very discouraging unless you are a very dedicated modeller.

I built my layout as a chain of stand-alone layouts, even though the design doesn't show it at first glance. It can be taken apart completely. All of the baseboard units can be easily handled by two people, and most by only one.

I would start all over and go for a modular approach. If you build it along the walls in narrow units, access will be far better. And it will look far better. If you have to move house, the layout can be moved along. I have done so four times.

[Elmgate]

I would not disagree with Ted, and the other comments. As Ted is aware, on the NGRM Forum, I have explained my thinking and concluded that will retire my layout from exhibitions. It will be incorporated in a "permanent" home layout. However, ELMGATE still gives me satisfaction, so the decision to retain it is correct. It sounds like you are not so satisfied, so a new start is called for. Whatever you do - keep the sections handleable, even if you do not envisage moving them. PD hancock described (Narrow Gauge Adventure) the problems he had when dismantling his bedroom layout just to redecorate, and he nearly had to start again when re-erecting the layout!

Best wishes

Tim

[Tigger]

Sage advice from Ted and Tim, and a good suggestion from Julien.

If I were to start all over again I'd take a more modular approach. I've been lucky in that I haven't needed to move my layout in the (nearly) 40 years of its existance, except once, for re-glazing of the windows. It does unbolt but it's a big job!

Taking a modular approach would give you the chance to see a good measure of progress on a smaller area rather that a long project that you might feel is getting nowhere. Also, if you build a really superb layout that you're really pleased with, you don't want to have to half-destroy it to move house! (The sort-of PDH problem.)

My railway progressed from one end to the other so I was able to see good progress on one part before extending to the next.