Do your projects also end up bigger than intended?

I have found a trackplan that I like. Took only 20 years or so Now I start drawing this -more or less- to scale and came to the conclusion it will be about twice as large as I tought. And this isn't a large station: 3 quai tracks, 2 storage tracks and a local goods track. If I do it at scale I end up with 7.5m. If I set out only the switches an put them as close together as possible I end up with 3.6m and then I have to fit a quai between that. This means I have about 4.8m for a small station without any track to give it some proportion.

And this is Z !!!! How do those people in h0 or -god forbid- gauge 1 do this?

Well ... they either build modular layouts that are only put together occasionally in sport halls or similar and than there is nothing stopping them having 20 mtrs stations like this
Or they indulge in what's euphemistically called selective compression - for me the beauty of Z lies in the fact that we can avoid this as much as possible (never been a great fan of suitcase layouts )
Alternatively people model just tiny section, putting all the effort in the detail.
Each to his/her own
ps gauge 1 simply goes into the garden

Or they indulge in what's euphemistically called selective compression - for me the beauty of Z lies in the fact that we can avoid this as much as possible

I can't compress it more than putting the switches back-to-back...

Havac, I'm not much on suitcase layouts either. Anyway, are you doing your math correctly? If you are looking at an HO or N plan you should be getting a smaller result! However, one of the great myths of Z scale is compression. Sure, an HO layout will compress nicely, but an N layout is another story. Even though Z is smaller than N the compression ratios can be different because of using fixed radius track and turnouts. Most N to Z layouts are only slightly smaller. If we look at a small 2 meter x 4 meter N layout and make it Z we will end up with about 1.75 m x 3.25m. using fixed radius curves. Not much of a difference. The layout will become a bit smaller using flex track. Of course the beauty of not 'full' compression is that we are left with more room for scenery. This is Z scales strong point. Hope this helps. Cheers, Jim CCRR:)

It is a problem, to which there is no easy answer.

There is always the temptation, to be strongly resisted by those of us without attics, basements and double garages, of saying something like "Now if I add just a little bit space more I can fit in...". Having a strictly limited amount of space should actually stimulate us to produce a better design, unlike the IT industry where there's cheap memory and disk space to accommodate wasteful programs - in the Good Old Days programmers actually had to be smart designers.

Hmm, got off the track there a bit, but hopefully you'll see the point.

Havoc, is it possible to post your track plan here? One or more of us might have a suggestion or two.

I find I can't trust track plans when working on a large layout. Take a look at the yard in the upper right corner of this photo. I had the yard sketched out and figured I would have quite few long through sidings that I could store long freights. It looked great on paper. But, real track has it's own idea of how it should fit. Once the turnouts were put in place, I found the turnouts and track did not match my plan. I ended up using more stub tracks since I couldn't work in turnouts on some track for a true through track. It sill looks good, but is not quite what I had hoped and planned.



I use a track plan as a general guide. I let the track dictate the form.

Rob

This is one of the shortcomings of Z scale: you're strictly limited in what you can do with track plans by the number of different turnouts available. N scale has a vast array of available turnout geometries, from #4s to #10s, several curved types, wyes, double-slips and multiple crossing angles. Thus, a track plan developed for N (or larger) will almost always be problematic adapting to Z scale, the consequence usually being a larger layout than expected. As Rob said, you more or less just use the plan only as a general guide.

David,

Excellent point. The only commercial turnouts are #6 (both Marklin and MTL). For those willing their own track, Fast Tracks offers a wide of templates for turnouts. The Fast Track kit come is sizes from #4 to #10. Check out the to scale drawing of a #10 turnout, it is impressive:

www.handlaidtrack.com/redirect.php?goto=www.handlaidtrack.com%2Ftemplates%2Ftt-z-t-10.pdf&action=url

But for those of us using section track, we are stuck with the good old #6 turnouts. This is a good size turnout and a nice mid-range size. But it definitely is limited when trying to compress track in a tight space.

Rob

Anyway, are you doing your math correctly?

Sadly it is... A station of 2km in 1:1 becomes one of 9m in Z And that is a small station. I'm working from 1:1 here, not from a published model plan. So yes, it is smaller than what I started with but not as much as I hoped

It tought that with some moderate compression I could get it back to 4.8m (4 modules, size related to standard wood sizes). That's reducing it to almost 50%. I started by leaving out all straight space between switches. But this doesn't help much (or not as much as hoped.

Why not three sections of 3mtrs each?
Easier than modules (which have to allow interchangeability and mating with many/any other modules).
Sections only ever connect with the same section, so accuracy is much easier to achieve.
Even if you don't have permanent space for 9mtrs layout (I don't), it should be possible to find temporary space when you want to run your layout.
Plus it could be connected to and used as a part of larger module system (like FREMO).
Plus small sections are easier to work on.
Plus it would allow you to model more prototypical, rather than stunted version of ...

Because modules/sections of 3m are unwieldy. They don't go in the car, can't get them up/down the stairs (I live on the second floor) and too heavy to lift on your own.

Sorry if there is a misunderstanding between sections and modules. I'm going to make it in several parts that do not adhere to any modular standard (Fremo/Z-track/Zmod). I should/will call them sections from now on to avoid mixing the 2 ideas. The idea of making end pieces that would allow to attach to a real modular layout crossed my mind. But I'm not favorably impressed by the mentality of those groups. But it is always an option.

I was planning on making them as sections from the start. There is no space for a permanent layout. But it should be possible to put the sections up for a weekend.

Okay, I'll chew a bit more on it and post in the layout section when I think I have something showable.

Distinction between section and module is clear
You are right about 3mtrs being unwieldy
Look forward to seeing your proposals

Havoc,

I'd always assumed we could fit our three trains and various landscaping features on a 29.5" by 80" base which is a bit smaller than the size of our front door. We haven't had time to do detailed work on this layout yet, but we'll be using flex track when the time comes. Hopefully, by reading about your continued efforts to build your layout, we'll pick up knowledge that will help us in our own quest.

Beverly, it all depends a bit on what you want. Also the time period and the place you want to model. A small branch line in era II will take less space than a main line in era IV. I went for an electrified busy branch line in era IV with some possibilities for goods. So it ends up rather large.

One bit of advise, don't wait for me to start your layout! It took 20 years to just find a plan I liked...

Havoc,

20 years is a long time for me to wait for anything If I did that I'd be in my 70s! But I expect to take a while to figure out how to make what we want because of the complexity of what we envision building. Ours are steam passenger trains, so no electricity or industrial complexes will be involved. We haven't decided whether to do one, two or three tracks to accommodate all three trains. Time will tell for us. Please keep us updated