Jump to content
 

A new family 8x4 layout


Jaggzuk
 Share

Recommended Posts

If possible try to avoid curved platforms on set track.  The radii are so tight that you need to leave ridiculous gaps at the edge of the platform to prevent fouling; RTR stock also swings out far more than the prototype because a normal model 4-6-2 is basically an 0-6-0 with massive front overhang; the bogie does nothing to steer the loco around the curve.  it's not an issue at all with straight platforms.  If you only run small locos it's not as severe a problem. Carriages have their bogies right at the end and swing out very little.  The thing to watch with carriages is fouling in the middle if you have "inside" platforms, but that's not as bad as the issue of long locos fouling on "outside" platforms).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure about the tunnel on the right, but otherwise that's the layout I wanted as a kid.

 

Hi Zomboid, well lets hope my kids like it!  I know I am quite excited about it.  

 

As for the tunnel on the right, I am hoping that side will have more of an urban feel, so I will probably have a retaining wall between the inner loop and the tunneled loop with some buildings on top.  I am not that good at creating hard landscape features in SCARM, hence why it all looks very green !

 

The tunnel area on the left hand side will have more of a countryside feel.

 

 

Where are the curved platforms with set track?  His latest design has a fairly long curve (certainly in this context) on his platforms using flexi track.

 

Yep the the curved platform is as per your original design Jon and I would be forming it from flexi track.  But I think it will be worth a mock up just to see what the rolling stock swing and overhang of coaches and long bogie wagons is like in relation to the platform edge.
 
What is you view on my addition of the curved "setrack"points to the approach of the station?  I think it looks a bit more smooth and the platform is mow marginally longer now. I guess I would not normally want use these type of points, but after all we are talking about a "play" layout, so I am happy to use them.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a model railway that I have seen and have taken a lot of inspiration from.  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/album/3800-leyburn-model-railway/  The engine shed, and goods yard are very similar to what I have ended up with.  And although totally unrealistic, the tunnel in the corner just acts as a scenic break to what is just a roundy roundy

 
It is a twin track loop layout depicting elements of Leyburn, North Yorkshire on the Redmire branch.  The layout can be seen on the Wensleydale Railway at Bedale station waiting room.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was having a bit of a fiddle with the plan last night, in the main trying to improve the tunnel area on the left hand side of the layout (the 2 loop side). It now has a more urban feel which looks a lot better. Will post the plan once I have finished a few other minor mods.

 

One thing I did do which really helped with visualising the layout was to print out the plan full size, never done this from SCARM before. I only printed the station area to check the approach curves and to see just how tight the curved platform looked. And it looks much better than I had hoped, it looks quite gentle; for the type of layout it is.

 

You can look at a plan on a PC or sketch pad for as much as you like but to actually see it full size made such a difference, will go for a full print over the weekend.

 

Sub-note, I found this a useful page on how to print fullsize (1:1) from SCARM http://www.scarm.info/blog/advanced-techniques/print-whole-layout-in-1to1-scale/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, may be I am just going a bit too deep and fiddling too much on this one. but I am playing with curves and trying to get the track under the the bridge at a better angle.  Plus I have made the hight level line a bit more curvy.  It does offer a touch more space for a signal box near the level crossing in doing so.

 

So which is better of these two versions?

 

post-4412-0-71628700-1448046394_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit more of an update. Printed the whole layout at 1:1 over the weekend and on the whole things looked really good; the station area especially. The curved track trough the platforms is really nice and not too tight, so much better than just straight lines. The Superquick island station structure will fit perfectly too, along this the footbridge.

 

However, the one area that the full size prints really showed not to be working very well was the flyhover. The main issue was that the track that passes under it was too close to the track that goes over it and as a result there was no space for any retaining wall structures, so it just was not working. I have to admit that the 1:1 prints really helped to show problems that were just not apparent on the PC!

 

I tried to various changes to the approach curves, but just could not get it to work. The result, I have had to cheat and the layout is now 8'x4'(+2") The extra 2 inches added to the long sides has made all the difference. Each inch will actually be part of a new stiffening frame I will add to the sides so that the layout can be sat on trestles.

 

The extra 2 inches has allowed me to space out the three loops on the approach to the flyover such that things are much better now.

 

Please let me know what you think guys.

 

So the revised plan looks like this now (version 34, ha, ha)

 

post-4412-0-92815100-1448234051_thumb.jpg

 

post-4412-0-01975500-1448234063_thumb.jpg

 

post-4412-0-85538200-1448234069_thumb.jpg

 

post-4412-0-79605500-1448234076_thumb.jpg

 

post-4412-0-60165700-1448234093_thumb.jpg

 

post-4412-0-79290600-1448234082_thumb.jpg

Edited by Jaggzuk
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit concerned about the outside loop running along the edge on the long sides...

Well observed Memphis32, this is the "cheat" I mentioned in my last post. I am planning to add an extra 2" to the width of the layout, but I the have not widened the layout plan in SCARM which is still 8x4'. Basically it means I know not to go over the blue line. The basedboard will be widened outside the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did a bit of lunchtime model shop research while I was at work today, basically because I left my wallet back at the office, doh!  I did not realise there was now so much choice on track ballast.  I think the last time I bought some there was just light grey and dark grey and it was pretty coarse stuff at that.

 

Sometimes too much choice makes for a harder life, especially when you discover one particular brand of ballast contains nuts!  Nuts?  Ok, back to the arm chair for that one; which ballast is best?  No need to answer as I am sure there are as many answers as there are colours, grade and method of glueing.  But I am interested in the one made from nuts (Woodlands Scenics shaker bottles), as it is somewhat lighter in weight than real chippings.  From what I saw in the shop I am leaning towards the brown colours, as these should negate the need for post track weathering.

 

Plus, I have come up with the idea to pre spray all the track to weather it before it is fixed it in place, I am sure not an original idea, but is it a good one?  Basically it means I can do it out of the house and hopefully it will  be somewhat easer than trying to do it in situ.

 

Well hopefully this weekend will see more supply shopping; timber for baseboard stiffening, card and cord underlay and some spray paint to pre weather the track.

 

Hopefully soon the weekend 'blockade' will happen and that the TOCs won't mind not being able to run any trains for a while ;-)

 

A couple more photos, Current and proposed layouts:

 

post-4412-0-21952500-1448668319.jpg

 

post-4412-0-12375600-1448668330_thumb.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great topic; I've just started again after 30+ years (I'm 42) and built my base board 8x4 in my garage last week and entered the attic to rescue all my old stock - which works - just!

 

I've been looking at lots of layouts and this one is right up there as one of the best however I'm not too sure of my skills to make a 3 tier layout as yet. I have a few questions about it if I may:

 

1. Will you be going DCC?

2. If DCC; do you need Electrofrog points; which then brings the debate of Peco (or Hornby) streamline or settrack. I was going to use Peco personally so be interesting on your preference

3. Where will you store your passenger trains - this is something my daughter will want (4-5 carriage on the mainline) and no doubt will need a bigger siding; is it possible to tweak the layout for an outer siding possibly

4. Will the layout accommodate a small 2nd station somewhere - maybe on a hill inset?

 

I'm using anyrail 5 - is it possible to have a copy of your design; I don't (not looked at Scarm) as yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to RMWeb Johnjch2, and thanks for posting your first post to my layout topic. RMWeb is a great place to hang out for all things model railway (and the full size version too).

 

I am glad that you find the layout design a good possibility for your own, but as you will have read I cannot take the credit for its originality .

 

It sounds like you are on full steam ahead if you have started by building you baseboard already. I shall look forward to a possible topic of your build.

 

As to your questions , I will try my best to answer them:

 

1) Yes it will be DCC, and also analogue DC. Our current layout is dual control and the main reason for this is that I have an NCE Powercab and this cannot run DC locos. As we have another family in our village with an early days layout, but only DC locos, we need to be able to run with a DC controler when they bring their locos round. I have a simple box with two switches , one to turn the NCE on and off and then other to switch between each controller powering the track.

 

2) No you do not need Electrofrog points if you run with DCC. However, the advantage of electrofrog is they offer better smooth and slow running, especially if you have any locos with a low number of pick up wheels. However, for me I am all insulfrog on this layout . In part because I already had them, secondly I wanted to keep the wiring simple and thirdly, I have never had any real problem with them and the locos I already have even slow running and a Hornby 0-4-0.

 

3) Now storage is a very good point and perhaps one I have not fully considered. Yes there would be no reason why the width of the layout could not be increased to take in a small fiddle yard, possibly coming off in the two tunnels and running behind the flyover side of the layout or even a bigger loop fiddle yard; I might sketch this up later.

 

4) I guess you could fit in a small station halt on the high level flyover line, perhaps where the road bridge is. There could be access from this low level road up to the station. Again I like the idea.

 

As for the plan, more that happy for you to have a copy, but I am unsure if Anyrail can import SCARM files. Give SCARM a try, it is totally free and I have found it a really useful planning tool.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few more supplies purchased yesterday from Monk Bar model shop York. Now I have to say that this is a shop with very helpful staff indeed!

 

First off I got myself a pair of Xuron track cutters. Only having ever used a razor saw to cut track, oh my word how good are these! The cut it clean and straight and they cut the rail witb very little effort, so easy. Very impressed and well worth the money.

 

Next is point control, manual or electronic? I have decided to run a little trial with the boys before I commit on how to control the points on the layout. In particular the points that they cannot reach like in the goods yards.

 

The first method will be electronic control. After a bit of web research and as they were cheeper, I got myself a couple of Seep point motors, the switching version. The trial will focus on the boys interaction with some form of control panel. I already have a box of push button switches, but I have also seen, on the web, SPDT (on-off-on) sprung toggle switches being used for point motiors.

 

While in the model shop I also saw the Peco (passing contact) point switch. These look rather good as they come in different colours. The guys in the shop said that they would be better as there is less chance of point motor burn out using these, unlike the push button switch as these could accidently be held on by small fingers.

 

So my trial will include three point on a piece of MDF and one each of the point switches. I can then see which way the boys prefer and find the easiest. But any feedback from you guys on these three switch methods would be useful too.

 

As I am using insulfrog points I will use the Seep switch to change some LEDs on the control panel, again to help the boys know which what the point is set.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

So here is the final track plan, which has now gone in to the build phase, follow here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106602-family-8x4-oo-layout-%E2%80%93-the-christmas-engineering-blockade/

 

post-4412-0-50839800-1451599726_thumb.jpg

 

 

I have now added to the plan the scope for a future fiddle yard.  Both the FY spurs will come out from under the two tunnels and these will be built in ready for the FY addition at a later date.

 

The fiddle yard will allow the scope of running to be considerably increased as the boys grow up.  Plus we can keep all of our stock on the layout between operating session rather than re-boxing every time.

 

Anyway on with the build.... 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Paul -

 

Following my post on your current thread, I have just found this earlier thread, and followed the evolution of your design.

 

Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, I would really like to emulate your layout, the only difference being a "homage" to the S&C by changing the topography/scenics in the LMS era .

 

I have no experience of layout planning software (SCARM), is there any chance of sending me a "scale plan" as a starting point?  I would cheerfully reimburse you for any associated costs ...

 

Many thanks.  Roger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I like this plan; it ticks a lot of boxes.  Plenty of play value, which will turn into proper operation as the boys get older, and plenty of scope for extending it and making it part of a larger system if you ever have the space, very clever indeed!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands:

It's incredibly toylike.  It's a model railway - but not a model of a railway.

The inner (red) loop which goes up and down is just...odd.

The hills/tunnels are unnatural.

Operationally, a clockwise train from the fiddle yard can run round and round on 3 different loops.  An anti-clockwise train can only loop one possible way around.  I wouldn't have more than 1 train running at once - the risk of collisions would be too high.

You're running diesel locomotives (albeit from a wide historical era) on a track plan the complexity of which closer resembles steam-era operations.

 

My advice:

Actually, if you're going to use the extra space as you've indicated, you have got a lot more space to get a sweep of the track in.  Forget trying to get a complete roundy loop on the one board.  It just looks odd.  This in turn will give you wider radius curves, which your stock will look better on.  Then work out what you want from the rest of it.  You can get a double track main line in plus a set of sidings for one industry, or a car park (steam-era goods yards are now often car parks), or whatever.  And you can use less track...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest theonlydt

As it stands:

It's incredibly toylike. It's a model railway - but not a model of a railway.

The inner (red) loop which goes up and down is just...odd.

The hills/tunnels are unnatural.

Operationally, a clockwise train from the fiddle yard can run round and round on 3 different loops. An anti-clockwise train can only loop one possible way around. I wouldn't have more than 1 train running at once - the risk of collisions would be too high.

You're running diesel locomotives (albeit from a wide historical era) on a track plan the complexity of which closer resembles steam-era operations.

 

My advice:

Actually, if you're going to use the extra space as you've indicated, you have got a lot more space to get a sweep of the track in. Forget trying to get a complete roundy loop on the one board. It just looks odd. This in turn will give you wider radius curves, which your stock will look better on. Then work out what you want from the rest of it. You can get a double track main line in plus a set of sidings for one industry, or a car park (steam-era goods yards are now often car parks), or whatever. And you can use less track...

Wow.

It's for his kids.

 

"Wants" included "roundy roundy" and sidings.

 

They liked the tunnel. The hills are for interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

It's a starter layout, without scale pretensions, and as has been said has to accommodate play value for kids; i'd say it's a pretty good base to build on for the kids if they wished to go into something a bit more scale when they are old enough.  Two trains can be run simultaneously on various routes, which will teach the kids about routing and traffic planning, and experience will be gained for future layouts with the use of point motors and control systems.

 

I rather like it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul -

 

Following my post on your current thread, I have just found this earlier thread, and followed the evolution of your design.

 

Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, I would really like to emulate your layout, the only difference being a "homage" to the S&C by changing the topography/scenics in the LMS era .

 

I have no experience of layout planning software (SCARM), is there any chance of sending me a "scale plan" as a starting point?  I would cheerfully reimburse you for any associated costs ...

 

Many thanks.  Roger.

 

Hi Roger

 

When you say scale plan do you mean 1-1 or just a large image file of the track plan?

 

SCARM was really good for planning the layout and made sure that the plan I had developed was pretty much what got build and fitted.  However, the unfortunate aspect with SCARM now is that it has now gone in to Pay Software and you can only have up to 100 parts in the free version.  So I can no longer edit my plan, unless I pay for the upgrade.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the recent discussions guys, layout planning is always a great topic for debate and opinion, always appreciated.

 

But it is now built, well the landscape, track and electrics are with the scenic elements slowly coming on - see my Layout Topic and here's a cab view of the progress.  

 

https://youtu.be/QV_fc1kmfCw

 

 

I think my original brief has been met, my boys play on it most evenings after school and get totally lost in what every role game they are playing.  As for me, I am constantly learning new skills and findings out what things/products I like and what works well; all part of the plan for the much bigger (12x10) and more realistic layout I have been planning for years since 2010 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/topic/8961-north-marsh-road-eastern-region-br-blue-oo/

 

And sometimes I can just set two trains off and watch them go round and get absorbed into the layout, quite simple.  But the layout has now been developed in to a reasonably complex shunting puzzle helped by the adoption of Kadee couplings.  As the boys have now grow up since we started the build they can now tackle the challenge of shunting.

 

I think what is important for me is that there are areas of the layout that are scenically good and realistic, and best viewed at track level and close up.  From the birds eye view yes, it is a loopy and toylike layout, but that is what it is and is part of the fun.  There are some layouts I follow here with much admiration for their size, scenic wonder and realistic nature but there are no trains running and the build take many months if not years.  I have two train mad, eager boys to please!!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...