RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 27, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 Templot - general by martin_wynne original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:24 am General discussion about Templot You are very welcome to natter about Templot and general trackwork subjects in this topic. But please see also the Templot Club user forums for detailed user support. There is also a live chat room about Templot. Click to chat about Templot with other users. Martin. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:51 pm davej wrote: Great banner ads. Hi Dave, Thanks for the compliment. I'm glad you like them. So far I have been very pleased with the results -- they have been clicked 276 times in just four days. The power of RMweb! regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by davidpk212 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:57 pm It's too expensive for me. If it was maybe two thirds of the price I might buy it. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Andy G on Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:40 am Too expensive At less than ??????‚??50 for a niche product that works extremely well and must utilise a lot of very complex coding it is an absolute bargain - how much do you pay for a loco? Andy G __________________________________________ Comment posted by Phil on Tue Apr 01, 2008 10:45 am Andy G wrote: Too expensive At less than ??????‚??50 for a niche product that works extremely well and must utilise a lot of very complex coding it is an absolute bargain - how much do you pay for a loco? Andy G Have to agree with Andy G here. Although I am still working up to the planning stage using my Templot by practising on it, it is a very well spent 46 quid for me. Martin is a very helpful chap too. __________________________________________ Comment posted by backofanenvelope on Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:25 am Well at 40-50quid computer game, 50+ for most locos, 2 x reasonable quality DCC chips, nearly a mag sub.. the list goes on and in my opinion one of the best bits of software I own. Everyone has there own choice.. t. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pigs on Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:33 pm backofanenvelope wrote: Well at 40-50quid computer game, 50+ for most locos, 2 x reasonable quality DCC chips, nearly a mag sub.. the list goes on and in my opinion one of the best bits of software I own. Everyone has there own choice.. t. If I valued Templot by dividing the cost by hours of fun and enjoyment, I would in the pennies per hour costing - soon it will cost more to pay the leccy to run the 'puter than to run Templot. __________________________________________ Comment posted by backofanenvelope on Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:40 pm My thoughts exactly.. the number of times I have idly thought if something would fit it (this or that) space and then mess around with it, to morph into something completely different. But then I always have found planning a fun part of my modelling. t. __________________________________________ Comment posted by 6029 King Stephen on Mon May 05, 2008 7:50 am I would have to agree with the others. Since buying it and having a play around with it, I have managed to draw, print and build a D12 left hand turnout. I am currently building an E14 left hand crossover using the same methods. I think I will also use it to print templates for the curves and might even go for a station with goods yard on a curve once I have taught myself how to do that (in conjunction with the videos and other help tools, of course!). ??????‚??46? Fantastic value. __________________________________________ Comment posted by BoD on Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:41 pm I've just purchased a copy - and yes it is an excellent product and very addictive. I can feel a few micro layouts coming on. Just a query - I have tried to join the templot group on three occasions and it keeps telling me I have mis-typed the code. I'm sure I have typed it as is. Any suggestions? __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pannier Tank on Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:49 pm BoD wrote: I've just purchased a copy - and yes it is an excellent product and very addictive. I can feel a few micro layouts coming on. Just a query - I have tried to join the templot group on three occasions and it keeps telling me I have mis-typed the code. I'm sure I have typed it as is. Any suggestions? Take a look at http://www.templot.com/forum/ __________________________________________ Comment posted by flubrush on Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:50 pm BoD wrote: I've just purchased a copy - and yes it is an excellent product and very addictive. I can feel a few micro layouts coming on. Just a query - I have tried to join the templot group on three occasions and it keeps telling me I have mis-typed the code. I'm sure I have typed it as is. Any suggestions? Martin has been doing a major re-jig of the forum software over the past few days, so that may have been the cause of your problems. You could try emailing him at templot-at-85a-dot-nildram-dot-co-dot-uk - that's if he doesn't find this thread first Jim. __________________________________________ Comment posted by BoD on Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:14 pm Thanks for the quick replies. David. That was the one I was trying to register with. Jim. I will wait a while and see if it is sorted. If not I will get in touch with Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pannier Tank on Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:17 pm BoD wrote: Thanks for the quick replies. David. That was the one I was trying to register with. Jim. I will wait a while and see if it is sorted. If not I will get in touch with Martin. Ok, I thought you were trying to register with the Templot Yahoogroups. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:21 pm BoD wrote: Just a query - I have tried to join the templot group on three occasions and it keeps telling me I have mis-typed the code. I'm sure I have typed it as is. Any suggestions? Hi Warren, Sorry you are having trouble. I have recently implemented a CAPTCHA code on there to prevent robot registrations. (That's a Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart. ) The one there is regarded as especially effective. If you find the code doesn't work or you can't read it, just press F5 to refresh the browser page and try again with a different code. As far as I know it's working properly, but check your caps lock key. If you are still having trouble, please email or pm me with the user name and password which you want to use, and your email address, and I will do the registration for you. Glad to hear you are enjoying Templot. regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by BoD on Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:13 pm Problem solved. I was blocking cookies. Allowed them and registration worked straight away. Cheers. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:16 pm Hi, I'm from the Netherlands, and for the mainland, oddly enough modelling in 1:76.2 / OO gauge, as opposed to the "standard" 1:87 / HO. Intially, I had decided on Roco Rocoline code 83 track, and bought a big lot on German eBay. Over time the available layout space has grown twice ( involving a house move ) and the layout itself 3 times. It's now so much larger that the big lot of track and points bought will only fill the FY, whereas initially it was about 75% of my track total. In a way this is a plus thing. I encountered EM and P4, and these appeal a lot to me, looking so much better. Still ........... I'd like to stay in OO-gauge, as I do not fancy to convert/re-wheel my stock and still want to be able to receive OO gauge visiting stock. Neither do I want to redesign my trackplan, nor do I want my current track layout to look less sleeker, due to an increased track gauge width at a unaltered track layout. But there is so much as OO gauge track that looks more to scale ( mostly due to sleeper spacing and size ) and points that look more prototypical ( especially to the UK prototype ). The layout is designed with just one radious of points, the Roco "small radius" R10 ( 888 mm ), and one 3-way, made up of two off these offset. I'd like to substitute the Roco points in the design to templates of UK prototype Bullhead and Flatbottom points. Possibly A4 or A5, but I'm not too familiar with the actual layouts/templates of UK points. C&L track and points are the likely candidates to be used in the scenic section of my layout. Before committing to buying Templot, and possibly redrawing all track in Templot, then to be pasted in into the full scale print of the actual layout, can anyone of you provide me with templates for A4 and A5 points, so I can find out how well my current exact track layout will be able to cope with these kind of point ? I've scanned the 3 types of Roco points in, which you can use as an example to match as close as possible. Scan are available as colour scan and as B/W scan, and in 600dpi and 300dpi version. It's really short notice, but I'm off to Eurospoor in Utrecht tomorrow, and found out there's a supplier who sells C&L, so I like to buy a point kit for testing. Can someone provide templates and/or advice on choice of points prior to that, and if not in time, then at all ? Regards, Michel http://www.freewebs.com/shedcombe-upon- ... 300dpi.jpg http://www.freewebs.com/shedcombe-upon- ... 600dpi.jpg http://www.freewebs.com/shedcombe-upon- ... 300dpi.jpg http://www.freewebs.com/shedcombe-upon- ... 600dpi.jpg __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:45 pm Hi Michel, How long are the Roco turnouts? (Along the straight section, in mm) regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:06 am Hi Martin, Thanks for your swift response. ( As per usual, I get the idea ). I'm fairly sure I will buy Templot in due course, although it seems rather ( too ) late for a layout that's basically ready designed for Roco track and OO-gauge. The basic trackplan was designed in Wintrack, and saved as BMP in largest screen size. The first scenic section is 6.0 m x 1.2 m, and in pixels 7683 x 1539. The detailed trackwork and scenic items are all drawn in a basic was in MS Paint, as is the complete layout design. Quite a tedious task, with all items drawn pixel by pixel, only angled by GIMP and a massive amount of copying and ( transparent ) pasting. Detail wise, the track is quite cruel, but was never intended for hand built or kit built, only to align RTR Roco track and positioning of scenic items. The trackplan scale comes in as 128 pixels = 10 cm and the drawing of 7683 x 1539 printed at 32.5dpi will get it in 1:1 layout scale of 6.0 m x 1.2 m, very heavily pixelized. The points are 230.0 mm straight section, the radius ( but which ? ) 888 mm and the curve is a 15 degree angle, while AFAIK the frog angle is 10 degree. The 3 way is a left then a right, offset by a quarter point length, so should be overall 287.5 mm. Thanks in advance for your help. Kind Regards, Michel __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:20 am ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: The points are 230.0 mm straight section Hi Michel, I made it 232mm, so close! Here is the nearest quick match: Switch 9ft straight Crossing (frog) 1:4.85 curviform pattern. The internal geometrical radius is 778mm. The exit angle is 15.8 degrees. You will be able to get a nearer match in Templot with a bit more fiddling about. This is in 00-SF standard for improved appearance. More about that at http://00-sf.org.uk regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:39 am Martin, Thanks a lot, very fine ( and quick ) effort. As I've never built any track yet, I'd like to stick with standardised prototypical UK paints as well as use kits from C&L. Can you please check which point comes as close as possible, and could you show them on top of each other ? Can you also provide a printable template in 1:1 scale of your Roco matching effort as well as of the nearest standard UK point ? I intend to use BH rail on older sections and FB on newer layout areas. I appreciate there are differences in geometry ( although don't know which ) and that BH is easier to achieve / obtains as kits. It's all just so I know in what way I can get away with my current trackplan layout ( bar the Roco points ) and/or if I need to adjust more intensively. Will also help to determine what point kit I should be buying for a test built. Templot's on my wish list for when the holiday money comes in, or better even, the ( small ) end of year bonus comes through. Thanks again so much. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:45 am Martin / others, Another question, on a side note. In all scales and at all kinds of prototype points, timbers/sleepers don't seem to step up in length ( relatively ) to the same radius as the inside stock rail of the point ( taking the straight end angle of the sleepers into consideration ). Is there any reasoning for this, and if so, which is it ? Regards, Michel __________________________________________ Comment posted by flubrush on Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:22 am ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: Martin / others, Another question, on a side note. In all scales and at all kinds of prototype points, timbers/sleepers don't seem to step up in length ( relatively ) to the same radius as the inside stock rail of the point ( taking the straight end angle of the sleepers into consideration ). Is there any reasoning for this, and if so, which is it ? Michel, Timbering for point and crossing work in the UK was/is pre-cut in six inch increments (in Imperial days - maybe 150mm in these Metric days) so you get the stepped effect when following a curved stock rail in a turnout. I would assume that centralised preparation and cutting of timbering to set lengths would be the preferred method of working which would avoid the complication of cutting timber to precise lengths to suit individual turnouts, etc. Also, the wood used for timbering is extremely hard so cutting this would probably be best done with appropriate machinery at a sawmill. Jim. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:18 am Thanks so much Jim. I thought it must be something like that. Any idea when what length is/was decided ? How far does the sleeper neet sticking out past the chair as a minimum ( and when not, then the next long timber still applies ) ? ----------------------------------------- Since late yesterday evening/early last night, both the image embedded by Martin as well as his forum avatar ( both based inside http://www.templot.com ) seem to have disappeared, with the Templot site not working at all. Did/does anyone else experience this too ? I hadn't saved Martin's sample pic yet, and can't find it cached on my PC, though would need to print it out, and take along to the Eurospoor exhibition. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 27, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:37 am ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: Since late yesterday evening/early last night, both the image embedded by Martin as well as his forum avatar ( both based inside http://www.templot.com ) seem to have disappeared, with the Templot site not working at all. Hi Michel, My UK hosting ISP seems to be having trouble this morning. Here it is again, hosted in Ohio: For 9ft switches, buy "A" size blades -- they have the same planing angle. If buying vees, buy 1:5 and adjust them slightly if needed for assembly. If buying ready-made crossing assemblies (frogs), buy them with 1.0mm flangeways (as EM) for 00-SF or 1.25mm flangeways for 00-BF (and NMRA H0). regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:54 am Hi Martin, Much oblidged. I'd like to buy ready kits by C&L, thus need to stick with basic points like A4/A5/B5 etc. Can you match/compare the "Roco converted effort" to an as close as possible UK prototype size point ( in BH and / or FB ) please ? And could you make a 1:1 print available of both such a point and the "Roco converted effort" template ? Regards, Michel __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:06 am ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: I'd like to buy ready kits by C&L, thus need to stick with basic points like A4/A5/B5 etc. Can you match/compare the "Roco converted effort" to an as close as possible UK prototype size point ( in BH and / or FB ) please ? Hi Michel, The design I posted is a UK prototype turnout, although a rather odd one. Standard 1:5 or 1:4.75 crossing components would have been modified on site to create the required lead length and radius for 1:4.85 You can't have a common UK size and a match to your Roco turnout at the same time. If you buy an A5 turnout kit you should be able to modify it to match the Roco. To be honest, I don't think it's very sensible to try to build UK prototype track matching your Roco geometry. It would be much better to re-work the track plan to use the common UK prototype sizes and geometry. And could you make a 1:1 print available of both such a point and the "Roco converted effort" template ? Sorry, that's equivalent to giving away free copies of Templot! regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:28 pm HI Martin, Back from the Eurospoor exhibtion. The only Dutch supplier ( he's basically UK modelling focussed ) of C&L has stopped stocking any, effectively stopped trading it. So no luck in comparing my Roco point geometry with a C&L template of a BH A4/A5, and thus neither a chance to buy a first point kit as a test bed for the first steps in track building. I appreciate there are a few choices to be made initially, roughly OO, OO-BF, OO-SF, EM and P4. I don't like to re-wheel all my stock, so P4 is rulled out. Then all OO variations versus EM. How does EM go with standard wheels and axles, with the wheel just set to the wider gauge ? And how about the building of track and points, how well do ( available ) options in EM , OO, OO-BF and OO-SF compare. Owning already quite a lot of good quality HO / OO track from Roco, ideal for the Fiddle Yard, I'd like to stick with OO, OO-BF or OO-SF, and the latter two, only if this gives no problem with using the roco track off scene. I appreciate that the Roco point geometry does not compare to a common UK prototype point. I'd like to stick with the UK prototypes, but how do I read UK prototype points and talks about stretching and bending of points in Templot ? What remains prototypical, demension wise, and what taking it away from being prototypical ? I may need to re-draw / adjust to suite / match UK geometry. -------------------- Martin, I appreciate that you don't want to hand out Templot templates, but I was only looking for a comparison of Roco vs. A4 and A5, to help me decide on purchase on a first point kit. With the inevitable lurking, a patient CC and just accidentally forgetting to mention SWMBO, I've taken the plunge, and purchased Templot, even though ( modelling ) budget is currently not there. Plenty of help around, when both have the program running !!!!! -------------------- I'd like advice on the choices for OO, OO-BF and OO-SF, with a clear understanding of their differences and implications thereof, keeping in mind that I don't want to re-wheel, have got modern Lima as the corsest wheel ( I guess ) and will be using Roco code 83 HO track off scene and prefer to use C&L track and point kits. Thanks do far for now. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:02 pm ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: I'd like advice on the choices for OO, OO-BF and OO-SF, with a clear understanding of their differences and implications thereof, keeping in mind that I don't want to re-wheel, have got modern Lima as the coarsest wheel ( I guess ) and will be using Roco code 83 HO track off scene and prefer to use C&L track and point kits. Hi Michel, If you don't want to modify your wheels, EM and P4 are ruled out -- it has to be 00. I wrote a comparison of the different 00 standards at: http://www.templot.com/forum/view_topic ... o=567#p567 If 00-SF interests you, there is a web site at: http://00-sf.org.uk and a Yahoo group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/00-SF If the other 00 standards appeal to you more, see http://www.doubleogauge.com regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:14 pm Martin, Thanks a lot for these links. Will look into them tomorrow evening. Maybe some of my questions still standing may be answered after reading the info behind the links. If not, they remain standing, and I'll be back for the choice to be made firmly ( before I can dive into Templot ). Now off to bed. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:09 am ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: The first scenic section is 6.0 m x 1.2 m, and in pixels 7683 x 1539. The detailed trackwork and scenic items are all drawn in a basic was in MS Paint, as is the complete layout design. Quite a tedious task, with all items drawn pixel by pixel, only angled by GIMP and a massive amount of copying and ( transparent ) pasting. Hi Michel, I downloaded your track plan from your web site in order to have a look at it in Templot. It's an amazing piece of work, I have never seen anything so detailed all done in MS Paint. It must have taken you hours and hours. (By the way, the JPG file format is intended only for photographic images, it's not suitable for computer graphics such as this. As a result your file is a massive 18 MB in size. I converted it to 8-bit PNG format with no loss of image quality, and the size came down to less than 3 MB. I've uploaded it to my web space, but I won't post a link until you say ok copyright-wise.)* I loaded it into a picture shape in Templot, using your dimensions, and this is the result ("bright night" colour scheme). Unfortunately the 800-width limit on image size in RMweb makes it difficult to post large track plans: In this next view I set up a CA-5 flat-bottom turnout. That's a curved flexible size A flat-bottom switch (BS-110A, BS-113A inclined series) combined with a 1:5 (#5) V-crossing angle (frog). This turnout is slightly longer than a standard bullhead A-5. I then tried aligning it over one of your Roco turnouts. It's very noticeable how the UK-pattern timbering in 4mm/ft scale is much larger than the H0 sleepers (ties). This template is set for the 00-SF standard: The V-crossing is of the "generic" type in Templot, meaning that the turnout curve terminates at the "fine point" (gauge-intersection), shown by the pink line. By changing to the "regular" type of V-crossing you could insert some "crossing entry straight" in front of the V-crossing, so shortening the turnout to make a better match with the Roco (but at the expense of a reduced turnout radius). This isn't un-prototypical, but the standard lead lengths are only modified in this way where space constraints make it unavoidable. In practice, unless you model in P4 the lead lengths in 4mm scale will be wrong anyway, so modifying them further is not something to worry about too much. In this next view I have zoomed in, and I am adjusting the exact position of the turnout to best match the underlying rails. For this kind of work it would be easier on the eyes to convert the image to a low-contrast grey-scale image as a background guide. Having looked at your plan I think your intention to directly replace the Roco turnouts with hand-built ones in 00 is not perhaps the best idea. It would be better to re-work over the whole plan in Templot with the additional controls which Templot gives you. For example, all your turnouts appear to be dead straight. You could get a smoother flow through the tracks and easier radii if you make some of the turnouts slightly curved. Also, in prototype terms an A-5 turnout is extremely short. There are places in your plan where you could use longer ones, which would be more prototypical and look a lot better. Generally you should aim for 1:6 as the shortest crossing angle for all areas except use in cramped goods yards. If you could adopt B-6 turnouts as the minimum, the overall impression would be much more prototypical (even a B-6 is very short in prototype terms). *After downloading images they must be converted to the native Windows BMP format for use in Templot. There is a Templot video showing how to set up a background image: display a track plan image as a background guide 39MB (broadband only). regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Tue Oct 28, 2008 11:13 am Marin, Apologies for the short reply now, will write more tonight after work, am about to go in 30 minutes. Very impressed with the amount of work and effort you put in helping out, and getting me started/sorted on proper track. Was very far advanced in a full and thorough reply to you on you last great posting. Then on trying to upload an attachment, a interrupt message from the forum itself forced me to an incomming PM. Upon trying to deny this action and go back by the backwards button in the browser, all written reply entry was gone. Well over half an hour of reply gone. Very annoyed by this forum feature. Hope Andy Y can do somwthing against this !!!!! No time anymore to re write, as I have to get dressed and make something to eat. Will be back later. Again apologies. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:12 pm martin_wynne wrote: ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: The first scenic section is 6.0 m x 1.2 m, and in pixels 7683 x 1539. The detailed trackwork and scenic items are all drawn in a basic was in MS Paint, as is the complete layout design. Quite a tedious task, with all items drawn pixel by pixel, only angled by GIMP and a massive amount of copying and ( transparent ) pasting. Hi Michel, I downloaded your track plan from your web site in order to have a look at it in Templot. It's an amazing piece of work, I have never seen anything so detailed all done in MS Paint. It must have taken you hours and hours. (By the way, the JPG file format is intended only for photographic images, it's not suitable for computer graphics such as this. As a result your file is a massive 18 MB in size. I converted it to 8-bit PNG format with no loss of image quality, and the size came down to less than 3 MB. I've uploaded it to my web space, but I won't post a link until you say ok copyright-wise.)* Hi Martin, Is it still appropriate to clog up this topic so much by this single discussion/project, or should it better been in its own topic or better on the Templot forum ? Thanks so much for all your effort and help/advice so far. Thanks also for your positive remarks about the trackplan drawing. It's indeed a massive file, and a very tedious process to get everything that detailed. It's also my pitfall, I'm a sucker for perfection. BTW, the original master file is drawn in BMP @ 33.8 MB, with the versions containing the FY at home and at exhibitions coming in 96 and 118 MB. The drawing is also outdated, but you could not really know that. I'm finalizing and improved/tweaked design, to be published hopefully soon. That is ............ this was planned to be released, before I decided to change from Roco to C&L track, and now with Templot knocking on my door, it may see much more delay, but more importantly, improvements overall. Fact is, the size remains 1.2 x 6.0 meter, but the FY design has been split to 2 levels, and the top FY will become a second scenic section ( 0.4 x 6.0 meter ), for the Mendip WRD. ------------------------- Let me first explain something about the original design, followed route and improvements now on the way. The trackplan was drawn in a DEMO version of German program Wintrack, using Roco settrack code 82 track. I've basically used plain track, the small radius ( R10, 888mm ) points and some R10 and R20 ( 1776 mm radius ) curves. No flexi track, as the program doesn't really cope with this, AFAIK. This was all done over 3 years ago, in our previous rental house. The layout was designed without a place to build and exhibit it really. Wintrack basically draws box shapes for track, and you can place some simple scenic items next to it. Nothing really fancy, and certainly nothing like the trackplan looks now. The demo version of Wintrack does not allow saving or printing. I worked around this with the free screen capturing program Screen Grab Pro. With the trackplan shown at maximum magnification, I was able to save it in a total of 60 screen shots. These were later copied and pasted into one file, the large one of 7683 x 1539 pixels. The conclusion thereof meant that 128 pixels = 10 cm. With the given track width, this meant I had to transfer the Roco track measurements into something as close as possible, within the given amount of pixels. Sleepers are 4x37 pixels, there are 21 pixels between rail heads, with the head 1 pixel and the foot 3 pixels wide. The plain track was an easy task. A separate background texture "ballast" was the basis where the plain track was pasted on. Points and curves more difficult to establish. Not having a scanner back then, made by using the Wintrack simple box shapes curves, I pasted plain ballasted track in sets of two sleepers on top of the curve box, with using GIMP to angle these track bits angle for angle. Curves are therefor not more then a approximation of correct alignment / radius. Same with the point, although this did involve plain track, a curve and some hand drawn intermediate bits. Also here the approximation of correct alignment applies. Gimp has been used to angle these master templates to the desired angles of the trackplan. Scenic items were all hand drawn and angled in a similar way. Textures for all kinds of backgrounds made. A tedious amount of copying and pasting, over and over again, gave this end result ............ in the end. The changes ................ I was not happy with several aspects, especially the righthand end. Also, a lot of alignments/ track lengths needed some adjustments, to allow for ( slight ) height differences all over the layout surface. Here's a 9 percent size sample, showing current and new ( still in progress ) version. Changes are numerous. Too many to mention. Not all will seem obvious ( especially at this size ), but there's a lot a re-alignment, shifting around, extra track, and most importantly, the run through option to the west end ( towards the WRD ) whereas originally it was end-to-end TMD-FY only. Now it'll be end-to-end WRD-TMD-FY with a test running loop option TMD-FY-TMD. If you were to have the 2 versions in one folder, and view them on and on after each other in the Windows Imageviewer, you would notice all re-alignments and changes as a sort of slowly played movie, frame by frame. I have no problem with you handing out the link, people can use the whole design as they see fit, but not easily change bits anyway. I've got all separate items as masters and in angled positions as BMP, if they want to make advantage, so be it. Must ask you though NOT to hand out the link to this OLD version. I'll upload the master of the current new version ( still in progress !!! ) to my website, and send you the link by PM, for now for personal use / advice / help towards me ONLY. When the version is finalized ( may now take some time, with new track by Templot / C+L in development ) and corrected/realigned in all areas, then I'm OK with whatever distribution may happen on it. I'm sure you understand, given your copyright conscience nature. martin_wynne wrote: I loaded it into a picture shape in Templot, using your dimensions, and this is the result ("bright night" colour scheme). Unfortunately the 800-width limit on image size in RMweb makes it difficult to post large track plans: That looks impressive, although small on here, but I can imagine how great it will look full blown within Templot. Must say this old trackplan version came about as a punch in the face, as I'm so much into the newer and IMO much improved version. martin_wynne wrote: In this next view I set up a CA-5 flat-bottom turnout. That's a curved flexible size A flat-bottom switch (BS-110A, BS-113A inclined series) combined with a 1:5 (#5) V-crossing angle (frog). This turnout is slightly longer than a standard bullhead A-5. I then tried aligning it over one of your Roco turnouts. It's very noticeable how the UK-pattern timbering in 4mm/ft scale is much larger than the H0 sleepers (ties). This template is set for the 00-SF standard: The V-crossing is of the "generic" type in Templot, meaning that the turnout curve terminates at the "fine point" (gauge-intersection), shown by the pink line. By changing to the "regular" type of V-crossing you could insert some "crossing entry straight" in front of the V-crossing, so shortening the turnout to make a better match with the Roco (but at the expense of a reduced turnout radius). This isn't un-prototypical, but the standard lead lengths are only modified in this way where space constraints make it unavoidable. In practice, unless you model in P4 the lead lengths in 4mm scale will be wrong anyway, so modifying them further is not something to worry about too much. Martin, I have a scenario in mind, that has about 40 percent of the site in use by BR as Mendip MPD prior to GM-EMD UK coming along on to the site, building their facility on the remaining 60% of the site. EWS/Mendip Rail took over from BR with the newly formed Mendip MPD, deploying all 59's. The former BR maintenance shed is given to a new "in house" preservation society, and the old fueling facility made way for a platform. A new fueling facility was made when GM-EMD UK built their part. Only a slight bit of track and some points will have been lifted, and replaced by something new, to connect the new bits on. The old track should all be in BH, the new track in FB, with rust colours and ballast colours different as well to suite. A drawing of this pre-layout situation is planned to be made as well, for story consistency / accuracy ( and to please my perfectionism ). ----------------------- I'm still very much puzzled as to when a point matches UK prototype look and or geometry. Besides sleepers spacing and size, a compromise still when not using P4, I can't follow when strict templates are used, and in what way shape/size may differ from it, and still be "UK prototypical" whereas a slightly different aligned Roco point is dismissed as incorrect, period !! Can you explain this a bit please ? Also wonder something, with my track being 16.5 mm gauge, and you matching a OO-sf point of 16.2 mm gauge on it, should the rails be closer together ? AFAIK, you're now resizing a 16.2 geometry point to match a point in 16.5 mm gauge. martin_wynne wrote: In this next view I have zoomed in, and I am adjusting the exact position of the turnout to best match the underlying rails. For this kind of work it would be easier on the eyes to convert the image to a low-contrast grey-scale image as a background guide. Also, as state above, the drawn curve radius is an approximation of alignment / curvature, so trying to overlay exact may be unnecessary take the UK geometry off too much as well. martin_wynne wrote: Having looked at your plan I think your intention to directly replace the Roco turnouts with hand-built ones in 00 is not perhaps the best idea. It would be better to re-work over the whole plan in Templot with the additional controls which Templot gives you. For example, all your turnouts appear to be dead straight. You could get a smoother flow through the tracks and easier radii if you make some of the turnouts slightly curved. Also, in prototype terms an A-5 turnout is extremely short. There are places in your plan where you could use longer ones, which would be more prototypical and look a lot better. Generally you should aim for 1:6 as the shortest crossing angle for all areas except use in cramped goods yards. If you could adopt B-6 turnouts as the minimum, the overall impression would be much more prototypical (even a B-6 is very short in prototype terms). Of course, it's best to look if realignment and a neather flow can be created. On one hand, of course, all points are dead straight, as they are RTR points after all. On the other hand, I still don't understand, as mentioned above, how you read the UK geometry and by curving the point still can say its UK geometry, while the Roco point is definitely not. Of course, I like a more flowing track layout. I often envied such designs, while mine seemed to be too much coupled straights, hence one of the reasons for the re-design, and the at least giving the front area a more natural flow in the track. Will be a VERY steep learning curve to get going in Templot, and quite some time afterwards to merge the Templot plan into a new full blown trackplan with scenic areas changed, as per my current MS Paint effort ( albeit at lower resolution of the track as Templots generic output ). What DPI is the generic Templot output BTW ? Having got no experience in track building, and with the aim to use as much C+L points / kits / parts as possible, how well does all that adapt to curvatures within the points ? martin_wynne wrote: *After downloading images they must be converted to the native Windows BMP format for use in Templot. There is a Templot video showing how to set up a background image: display a track plan image as a background guide 39MB (broadband only). regards, Martin. Will check the video tutorial. Have to check much much more. Good thing is, all master are in BMP already. Looking forward to yet more input from you. Apologies if it's all too much. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:47 pm Hi Michel, Thanks for sending me the updated file. I have spent a few minutes creating a Templot plan over part of it. This illustrates how much the design can be improved if you can get away from the rigid set-track style of the Roco turnouts. These here are mostly B-7 turnouts aligned onto gentle curves. Although they are much longer than the Roco turnouts, there is no loss of yard capacity because of the way they can be curved and interwoven when building your own track. This size of turnout is much more prototypical for a location such as this than the very short A-5 turnouts which you were asking about. Here is a link to a topic with some pictures of excellent hand-built 00-SF trackwork to illustrate the same thing: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=26858 I will write again shortly to answer some of your specific questions. regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:36 pm Woooooowwwwwwwwww !!!! Martin, Upon checking my mail and forums early this morning, just before going to work, I almost wetted my pants !!!! I'm litterally gobsmakcked with the mervelous piece of flowing trackwork you've managed to lay on top of my basically Roco set-track trackplan. In true words a piece of TRACKPLAN ART ( indeed, in capitals as well !!! ). I'm still a VERY long way off from getting to grips with Templot ( language barrier may be there also, but only to a slight extend ), let alone, produce something as beautiful as you've managed. Mastering the skills to look with a different perspective to options to get a better flow is another issue. Knowing more about point options/possibilites is a plus, if not a must, really. Then there will come actual track building and developing of skills that needs to go with it. As a bare minimum, I could do with advice / pointers to better flow options of all other parts of the layout as well, if you see any / advice any. Baseboards joints may proof difficult barriers in terms of alignment improvement / larger radius. Like much the way you try to keep yard capacity untouched. Many many thanks so far. Templot / handbuilt track is deffo one of the best decisions made, and just in time. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:56 am Martin, I'm very much eagerly ( and probably impatiently ) waiting for more info/answrs to come off you, so I can step up and take a further steep learning curve to get my layout re-designed/tweaked in Templot. Also like to know the differences of BH and FB, as I like to use both. The example area you show off with is actually intended to be in FB. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:21 am ShedcombeUponFrome wrote: I'm very much eagerly ( and probably impatiently ) waiting for more info/answers to come off you, so I can step up and take a further steep learning curve to get my layout re-designed/tweaked in Templot. Hi Michel, As mentioned in my order-confirmation letter, there are detailed docs, tutorials and videos to help you get started on the Templot web site, see http://www.templot.com/martweb/tutorials.htm There is too much to copy to this Templot-sponsored section of RMweb, which is mainly for intending Templot users and general questions. If you need detailed help in using Templot it is better to ask on the Templot Club forum: http://www.templot.com/forum Also like to know the differences of BH and FB, as I like to use both. Bullhead (BH) track uses small rail of bullhead section, which is similar to I-section. It is supported in heavy chair castings, and held in place by means of wooden or spring steel keys which engage in the rail web. Flat-bottom (FB) track uses heavier rail similar to an inverted T-section. It is supported on baseplates and held down with clips or spikes which bear on the rail foot. Bullhead is the traditional "steam era" track used in the UK until the early 1950s. From that time, main running lines have been progressively replaced with flat-bottom track, but a lot of bullhead track still remains in loops, sidings and yards. This link for example shows some bullhead track at Banbury still in use earlier this year. The smaller rail and large chairs give bullhead track a much more "knobbly" appearance than flat-bottom track. Here are some close-ups: There are lots more pictures of BH and FB track details on the Scalefour web site at: http://www.scalefour.org/resources/track.htm regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by dave_long on Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:06 pm Hi Michel I spotted your post in the thorne yard thread, that your considering building your track to 00-SF gauge. Good on you on. another convert. I see Martin has been doing a stunning job on some of your plans there. Have a little look at my layout thread it's all SF track. Have you signed up for the yahoo group yet? You'll need to if you want the main SF gauges that we have available. We're a friendly bunch and to be honest most of us are members here too, with pretty much the same usernames. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Melly on Thu Dec 25, 2008 11:55 pm Oh God....it's like swimming through treacle!!! Anyone able to point me in the right directions (viewed the vids but the toolbars are not the same as the current software !!) Okay - to start you need to be able to draw your available area and change it to Feet not mm...how's that done? Got the track - put in the point - slewed up and down but I'll be buggered if I can add the 'branch-line'; that option is not in my tool bar? Finally - where are the diamonds crossings? Looked through all the drop downs and not found it yet. Ta very much. Melly __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Dec 26, 2008 12:36 am Melly wrote: Oh God....it's like swimming through treacle!!! Hi Melly, It's all explained in the order confirmation email which I sent you. Please read through it again. Basically you can either: 1. Follow the static track plan tutorial using the original version 074b which you downloaded, or 2. Follow the videos after upgrading to version 091c. Your choice, but if you are struggling I recommend upgrading to 091c sooner rather than later, and then following this video if you are primarily interested in track planning, or this video if you are primarily interested in printing individual templates. But mainly, please join Templot Club for lots of friendly help. regards, Martin. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Dec 26, 2008 2:46 am Melly wrote: Okay - to start you need to be able to draw your available area and change it to Feet not mm...how's that done? Hi Melly, {2nd reply} I suggest that's not the best way to start. It's better to begin by just generally playing about in free space until you get the basics, and if possible try to get used to working in millimetres. We mostly model to a scale of 4mm model size/prototype ft, so by default Templot uses mm for model sizes and inches for prototype sizes to match that. If you use imperial sizes for the model dimensions, you can easily get in a muddle. However, you can work in model inches if you prefer. To do that you prefix data with a letter i. So when Templot asks you for a model size in mm, you can enter say i12 instead, to mean 12 inches. Templot will then convert it to mm for you. Baseboard and room outlines are created as background shapes, and saved separately from your track plan, in a .bgs file. You can create them by entering the actual dimensions, or alternatively by clicking two diagonal corner positions on the screen. I've made you a bit of video showing how to change the grid to 1ft spacings and create an area outline 8ft x 4ft, i.e. 96 inches x 48 inches. And then if you wish adjust the size, shape and position of it to something else. But you must first upgrade to version 091c, otherwise it won't make sense. You can do all the same things in the older version 074b which you downloaded, but the menus are different. Here's the rectangle outline video. I will add a few notes to the page later. Here are some detailed notes about background shapes. regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Melly on Fri Dec 26, 2008 10:02 am Thanks Martin - printed off both and will have a play. Will have a read through everything again - just suffering a bit from information overload at the moment... Merry Christmas. __________________________________________ Comment posted by ShedcombeUponFrome on Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:33 pm Hi, Calling out for ( experienced ) templot users going to Glasgow !!!!! I'll be demo-ing all 3 days on the DEMU society stand. Is anyone of you present at Glasgow / Demoing and/or willing to help me out / support me with Templot ? I need to get started with it. Can you demonstrate Templot to me ( and the audience as well - a good advertising chance here !!!! ), as I need to redesign my layout with Templot ? The current trackplan ( basically using set track components / points of Roco track ) should become much more prototypical and get a nicer flowing track designed with Templot Also, the layout now measures 6.0 x 1.2 meter, but I prefer to shrink it to 6.0 x 0.8 meter, and thus an adaption / change of the trackplan to allow for this is also on the cards at the same time. Some info on the trackplan is above in this tread. Regards, Michel __________________________________________ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy C Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 I have just done the track plan for the new layout and want to show it on RM Web for comment - how can I upload the image onto here as it wont take the box file - and cant find any instructions in the online manuals to enable me to do it. I'm probably being a bit thick here but time is too short in my life to become a complete techo geek! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted November 24, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 24, 2009 I have just done the track plan for the new layout and want to show it on RM Web for comment - how can I upload the image onto here as it wont take the box file - and cant find any instructions in the online manuals to enable me to do it. I'm probably being a bit thick here but time is too short in my life to become a complete techo geek! Hi Andy, Arrange your Templot screen as you want it and then press the Print Screen key on the keyboard. It's usually somewhere top right, next along from the F12 key. That key doesn't actually print the screen, it copies it. Then go into whichever program you use to edit pictures, such as Irfanview or Windows Paint, and click the Edit > Paste menu item. A copy of your Templot screen will appear. Then you can save the image and post it on RMweb like any other picture, in the Gallery or as an attachment. For best results save it in PNG format, but JPG format like a photo will work ok. The Print Screen key works for any screen, not just Templot. You can use it to save pictures from a web site. regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 The easiest way Andy is simply to do a Alt/Print Screen and then paste it into a photo shop programme that can then be uploaded to RMWeb. There is an alternative way which enhances the quality of the print and that is covered here. Printing plans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteScR Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 Martin, I know I have asked this before but I was wondering if a Mac version of TEMPLOT is on the cards yet? I know I could have it running using Parallels etc., but having taken advice, I don't want to put Windows anywhere near my Mac. (I know others will post saying its safe but I dont want to do it) 2009 has seen a 25% increase in Mac sales across the UK and its growing. Thanks Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted November 24, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 24, 2009 I know I have asked this before but I was wondering if a Mac version of TEMPLOT is on the cards yet? Hi Pete, I'm sorry, but there just isn't going to be a native Mac version of Templot. I don't own a Mac; I've never used a Mac; I know nothing about Macs. Templot runs very well on the latest Macs using Windows, and there are many Mac users running Templot that way. If you don't want to use Windows, you could try installing Linux on your Mac. Templot can be run under Linux using the Wine emulator. Alternatively, a used Windows computer can be found in your local small-ads at very low cost. Templot runs on all versions of Windows back to Windows 95. It will be clunkier to use, but the finished template prints will be identical to those from the latest computers (using the same printer). regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinkmouse Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 ...I'm sorry, but there just isn't going to be a native Mac version of Templot. I don't own a Mac; I've never used a Mac; I know nothing about Macs. ... Hmm, perhaps I should send you my old PowerMac G4. However Pete, I know what you mean about PCs. I'm not lucky enough to have an Intel Mac, so I have an old 1.2GHz PC I use for Templot, Autocad, and some specialist PCB design and audio analysis s/w. It's not ideal, another box under the desk, but it gets the job done. Have a look out in your local Freecycle, quite often older machines are given away free there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteScR Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 OK Martin , I get the message, had to ask Working on an Intel iMac is a joy so I am loathed to take a back step. I do have a PC I bought for ??50 for this very reason. I will get it dug out and go buy a bag of coal to stick in the back and see if I can get it fired up Cheers Pete (Once you've tried a Mac, you will never go back!....unless) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy C Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 Thanks Martin and Gordon - expect to see the results sometime when I get home from work under "Spartbottom" - I kid you not. Mind you I do have a Manchester MRS comittee meeting to attend tonight so it may well be a bit later! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Pannier Tank Posted November 24, 2009 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 24, 2009 2009 has seen a 25% increase in Mac sales across the UK and its growing. What was the % increase in PC sales for 2009? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.