I wish more people would get into 'point to point' layouts..1:1 scale RRs don't go in a circular pattern (roundy round). They go from one point (could be interchange here w/another RR, division, branch) to the other and are basically squiggly lines with reversing ability at each end via turntable, wye, or balloon track (usually found in huge passenger terminals/yards)..
To me, anyway, P to P forces one to have to operate like the real thing. This in turn leaving a feeling of having accomplished more realistic RR ops..This is no value judgement toward other types of MRRs. It's just that I'd think there would be more folks running this way. You can still have a doubled over/under looped track scheme to give it mileage. I'd truly would love to see club layouts this style..
The problem with this view is that it DOES imply a value judgement, specifically that there is something inherently superior about "realistic ops". There are two problems with realistic ops. One is that it's a lot of work -- both in terms of planning and setup on the part of the layout builder / operating session host, and also on the part of the individual operators. Yes, some people love this challenge, but others don't, and there is no reason why we should exclude them from the hobby because they're looking for relaxation rather than mental gymnastics. The second problem is that a layout optimized for operations usually doesn't "run" well, so if people prefer to "railfan" -- that is, watch trains run rather than doing it themselves -- they need a layout that is optimized for that. This is especially true for layouts with a lot of visitors who aren't operating the layout.
I recently designed a layout for a gentleman who had me add sidings, a port area, industrial spurs... it looked like a lot to do. But he didn't install actual turnouts -- just pieces of additional rail to make it LOOK like turnouts. Because all he wanted to do on his layout was watch the trains run. There were 3 completely independent loops... the rest of it was just for show.
Look at how I operate my layout. It really is just a couple of big loops, although most trains begin and end in Cedar Hill Yard (which serves as staging rather than a true classification yard). BUT rather than run a couple of dozen short passenger trains, which would be prototypical, we just put ONE passenger train into a continuous orbit. With a little imagination, this train SIMULATES frequent passenger trains without the need to run each of them individually. Freight operators (generally me and my sons) drive the freight runs (which are determined by a simplistic draw from decks of cards, much like a board game), making sure we keep out of the way of the passenger trains and keeping turnouts properly lined for the main. He who has to run at unrealistic speeds, or, worse, hit the "Emergency Stop" button to avoid a collision or derailment buys beverages for the rest. This gives us the FLAVOR of realistic operations, with just a fraction of the work. And of course, when my mother and brother visit, they just want to see trains running around.
I think the commercial press does the hobby a disservice by implying that our models HAVE to be run like the real thing. There is plenty of room in this hobby for people of all tastes and preferences, and we should all be able to participate as we would like to, not how someone else thinks we should. The gentlemen for whom I designed the layout described above had thrown out his precious layout because his friends pushed him into a complex operating scheme, which he hated.
For most of us, the choice between point to point and glorified circles is a matter of personal preference, not lack of knowledge or understanding. Our mission, as more experienced modelers, should be to help beginners understand the different concepts, not to force or pressure them to do things a certain way.
