REVERSE RUNNING: Think shelf, not table! Stepping outside the box with a contrary view
Reader Feedback (click here)
— by Joe Fugate
Most newcomers contemplating a starter layout think of the ubiqui-
Given that table designs are rife with shortcomings, when will we break the mold and promote shelf designs over table designs on the cover of hobby books for beginners? Are we leading newcomers down a primrose path by promoting table designs as great starter layout options? One of the first concepts we need to teach hobby newcomers is: “think shelf, not table!” 8' x 10' = 80 sqft 4' x 8' = 32 sqft
That way, they can start off right away 4' x 8' = 32 sqft on the proper footing.
2' x 8' = 16 sqft
4' x 8' = 32 sqft
door
4' x 6' central area
2' x 8' = 16 sqft
door
1' x 9' = 9 sqft
8' x 10' = 80 sqft
Thanks to constant pressure to improve the art of track planning from innovative layout designers like the late John Armstrong, by the ‘60s we
4' x 8' = 32 sqft
6x8 central area
1' x 9' = 9 sqft
2' x 6' = 12 sqft
2' x 8' = 16 sqft
Tell a friend ...4' x 6' Contents qft
Page 125 • Issue 11-08 • Aug 2011 • Reverse Running Editorial
door
8’ x 10’ room configurations
central area
Index
1' x 7' = 7 sqft
One such concept is: think shelf, not table. Huh? Why is that?
Think for a moment about real railroads. They go from point A to point B – they aren’t loops that connect back up with themselves. Let’s leave a 3’ x 2’ clear access section in front of the entrance doorway. Now we’re down to 50 square feet, still much more than a 4’ x 8’ with access aisles on three sides, but no duckunder.
If you look at the history of the hobby, you can see the development cycle of moving from table to shelf in our collective consciousness as model railroaders. Layouts in the ‘40s and ‘50s were mostly tables in the middle of the room, with operating pits or access hatches galore. They were difficult to build, hard to scenic, tough to maintain, and a pain to operate.
By the ‘70s, walkaround shelf-based designs started to become accepted and then expected as a best practice. Modern layout designers automatically turn to shelf rather than table. The table’s shortcomings are now obvious.
2' x 6' = 12 sqft
T
hose of us who have been in the hobby for a while can forget that certain key hobby concepts aren’t always obvious to newcomers.
If you think shelves-around-the-wall instead of table-in-the-middle, you can get a much larger and more interesting layout in that same space. With 24” deep shelves on all sides of that room, you’ll get 56 square feet vs the 32 square feet of that 4’ x 8’. Almost double the layout space in the same 8’ x 10’ area! Continuous running is possible but a drawback is the need to duck under to get inside the layout (or provide a liftout section).
What if you need to use the room for other purposes? That 4’ x 8’ layout leaves a 8’ x 10’ room useless for anything but trains (and under-layout storage). But with 24” shelves around the walls, there’s still a 4’ x 6’ open area in the middle. If you really need free space, use 12” shelves and the open area increases to 6’ x 8’! Build the layout 60” high and you can easily tuck a bed or desk under it.
started to finally get it. Shelves give us more room to work than tables!
2' x 6' = 12 sqft
A huge problem is one of access. You can’t easily reach across a 4-foot distance, so you need “access space” all round the 4x8 sheet – or at least on 3 of the 4 sides. Access space translates as “aisle”. A typical minimum aisle width is 24”. If you’re realistic about it, you’ll need a (4’ + 2’ + 2’) x (8’ + 2’) 10’ space to house that 4x8 layout.
By moving to a shelf along the wall, you get a layout configuration that aligns much better with the linear nature of real railroads. By moving to a shelf configuration instead of a table one, you automatically start thinking point-to-point and staging – taking you to the next level of creative thinking for a layout that’s going to be more satisfying to operate.
1' x 7' = 7 sqft
tous 4x8 layout that’s on the cover of beginners’ books. Unfortunately, as layout designer Byron Henderson is quick to point out, the 4x8 is a very poor user of space.