Izzy

Thanks Jim, I think I’ve got some Easitrac glue left somewhere, I’ll give that a go when I can. Always good to try different techniques to see how you get on with them. In the distant past I only ever used embossed plasticard then at some point switched to brick paper and just seem to have forgotten how I did it back then. Bob

The Bridge I have now made the bridge. This took two attempts as the first was a failure. As usual I made the main carcass out of mountboard. Normally I produce brick structures using a carcass covered in brickpaper, A4 ink-jet printed label sheets. I find this far easier than trying to glue ordinary brick paper sheets onto the mountboard. However I know a lot of modellers use embossed plasticard and I thought that I would give this a go. The sheet was Slaters of which I have several sheets bought way back but never used in anger before. The thickness of the sheet made me wonder how I was going to blend the corners and disguise the joints but at first it seemed to go okay. It stuck to the carcass well but then joints started pulling apart. Deciding that perhaps this wasn’t going to work for me, or I needed to practice on something smaller to discover the best way to work with it I pulled all the sheets off the cascass. The idea I had was that I would just recover it with the brick paper but this didn’t work out. The act of pulling the plasticard off distorted it too much and broke it’s glued joints to a level that it couldn’t be saved. So, with a mornings work down the drain I started again, this time using the brickpaper. I kept the design simple. Square arches with overlays of brick to disguise where the joins are and to give relief to the flatness. The rear has been made to allow access to the pcb pads and brass wire springs for the electrical connections just in case they need adjustment at any time. For the moment the bridge just slots down into place but will be fixed permanently once all the track is laid, is working, and had been ballasted. With regard to the track I am considering adding another siding. As I built the bridge, looked at the expanse of bare board at the front of the layout, and wondered what to do to fill it, the scenery etc. it occurred to me that another point and siding would fit in and might balance things as well as providing more visible siding storage. Running through various shunting moves, how the layout will be operated, seems to confirm it could be a useful alteration to the plan. With plenty of parts to make the extra track and additional point, hacked servo, switch, the only downside is I will need to re-make the switch panel to add the extra switch. I would have liked to placed the point nearer the bridge to make the siding as long as possible but there isn’t the room for the servo to sit under the baseboard except between two others. Had I planned this from the start I could have placed them differently. But not now. Never mind. Bob

I totally agree with the way DCC is often overplayed/oversold when as said it’s the simple basic aspects that for most can have the biggest benefit. And this applies as much, more really, for small/micro layouts as larger ones. Not having to have sections and being able to run one loco right up to another if required is a prime example. DCC is very flexible in that you can pick/mix how to arrange it but the seemingly constant concentration on full automation does hide the many benefits. Bob

One aspect to be aware of is that no two decoder makes work in the same way as regards the basics of motor control. And some are far better than others. Zimo are pretty good whatever the motor involved while others can be very hit and miss. Will work okay with one loco/motor but not another. Using sound decoders adds yet another level and in respect to the MX648R and it's speed levels I wonder if this is connected to the particular sound project it has been loaded with. Many of these are now 'active' types in that F2 is used to brake the loco. So the loco if not braked using F2 it takes a very long time to slow down to stop. It may also be set to slowly accelerate as well. Another issue I have encountered is that, sometimes, I have needed to apply a factory re-set - Cv8 to 8 - several times before it will take properly. When I do one I always now remove the loco from the tracks/power after the re-set, and then re-rail it before trying it. A bit like re-booting a computer. Remove the power for the re-set to take properly. Bob

As they are flat sided cans they can only be iron cored. Coreless, by the nature of their design parameters, are only ever cylindrical cans. Bob

I've now reduced the Hunslet wheel flanges to 0.5mm. Here is a short video of the loco running on Exchange Yard sidings. The sound is at maximum which helps show how quietly it runs, virtually silently. Bob

Thinking about it overnight I decided this morning to deal with the Hunslet straight away. So this morning I dropped out the wheels and reduced the flanges to 0.5mm depth. While I was testing the loco on the layout after putting it back together it occurred to me that taking a video of the running quality might be a useful illustration of how good they are. As usual the actual video quality is wanting, I'm sorry about the frequent shakes etc. Once again this is trying to hold two phones at once, one in each hand! One to take the video, my iphone, and the android used as the throttle. A point to note is the sound is set at maximum. If you can't hear anything that just helps show the loco runs virtually silently, the only real sound is that of the wheels on the rail. Bob

Hunslet wheels A small update to say that I have just discovered that the wheel flanges are too deep for 2FS, or to be more correct to run on chaired track, as they hit the inside chairs. They are around 0.65-0.7mm deep while 0.5mm is the depth needed, which most present day N gauge rolling stock seems to adhere to. How/why I missed this when re-machining them I can't say but for anyone doing the same reducing them is thus advised. I shall have to now do this or perhaps try a 2FS conversion using 2mm SA wheels and other parts. Bob

Testing.....testing..... The wiring is now done. It didn't seem to take too long. Perhaps because of the small nature of the layout. So yet another advantage in favour of mini layouts. I started off with cutting a section out for the switch panel. All this kind of work is quick and easy thanks to the baseboard construction. Just a few minutes work with a scalpel. Edges covered with mountboard and then the panel could be fitted. More mountboard. just four SPDT. Three for the points, one to cut track power. I will add labels later, probably. This little layout has benefits on so many levels. Really simple trackwork with no need of traps, point rodding, ground signals etc. Just a few hand levers to add scenically. An underside view of the wiring. My go-to Tamiya tape keeping the wiring in rough order with the Vellmann power supply to feed the hacked servos the just under 6 volts they need, (it's set at 5.65v according to my MM). It's set on the board by a cermet trimmer potentiometer. Trouble is these are hard to set to exactly the right voltage. The slightest twist of the screwdriver can alter the output value greatly. After 10mins I decided that figure would do. With the fiddle board I came to the conclusion the track feeds needed to be at the foot of it, but how to get it there? In the end I cut a slot on the bottom for the wires. To energise the board/tracks I have chosen to use 0.9mm brass wire fingers that press on pads of PCB on it. The wire fingers are soldered onto more pcb held down in place with both PVA and more brass wire looped through the main baseboard and then soldered into the pcb pads. So as the fiddle is pushed into place electrical connection is made. As it's all now done apart for the other tracks that are needed testing has now been taking place on the place it will mostly be used and was designed for, the workbench. The locos were those which will mainly be used, my blue era stock, which doesn't get as much use as other stock. This testing revealed a few tweaks that were needed to the crossings and blades to get smooth and reliable running. That I'm also learning how to use the 'phone throttle app with the Z21 added to the fun. But one problem with this little chap was found. Now it's the whole reason the layout has come into existence but it wasn't at all happy running on the track unlike all the other locos. Hm. Stuttering, looking like it was running over a ploughed field. Up and down, bouncing around. What the heck? Pushing it by hand along a part where it just kept stalling revealed all. The flanges were bottoming on the inside chair jaws and the wheels lifted up off the rails. Mainly on the pointwork at the crossings and throught he closure rails. Oh dear. Why? The truth is quite simple. The flanges are too deep. Between 0.65 -0.7mm. Whereas of course they should be 0.5mm. This is my fault, in the sense I should have checked this aspect when I re-machined them to thin the flanges. I thought I had, but I can't have otherwise it would have stood out. And of course running it on soldered track didn't reveal it because there are no inside chairs to catch........ Oh bother, and words to that effect.....! This means another strip down, re-machine, and re-build. However since I have toyed with the idea of trying the 2mm/2FS wheel route perhaps that will happen now, just a bit sooner than intended. But I'll get the layout up and running properly and completely first. To make sure there are no other issues that come to light that would impact this decision. So it will be bufferstops and the other track next when the chairs are to hand. In the meantime I'm going to think through the scenic bits. A bridge, perhaps a hut of some kind, a few bushes. Anything else? Oh yes, the hand levers. What is that they say, the devil in in the details.... Bob

Over the years I’ve had two layouts that featured open wagon loading of aggregates, iron ore and sand. This was via hoppers. Not authentic in the main but achievable in a small scale model. These were nice aspects to have in respect of train traffic and children of all ages used to enjoy seeing them working at the odd few exhibitions the layouts went to. It worked well because the wagons were loaded on scene and emptied off, the reverse of most goods workings on layouts, so there wasn’t the conundrum of how they went from full to empty on scene. Bob

Totally agree. It’s this near obsession with the ‘6 foot way’ that’s the root cause of the problem. Far too much emphasis on this nominal figure in modelling circles rather than the standard structure gauge minimum figures. Doubt it will ever change though. Bob

No, a speaker can’t draw more watts than it is provided with. That figure is just an indication of how much watts the speaker can deliver/cope with. Bob

Following @WIMorrison suggestion I sent an enquiry to Roco regarding the Circuit Breaker settings options in respect of N gauge. This is the reply I have just received: This setting depends on the fleet you are using (age of the locomotive and its installed decoder) and the connected system (sections without insight). Modern N-gauge locomotives and the decoders installed in them can withstand much more than the decoders from 7-10 years ago. We can only recommend our Z21-Maintenance.pdf at this point." And this is what it's says, which is what I was hoping for more clarity on: Short circuit main track and Short circuit B-BUS: These options can be used to increase the response speed of the short circuit detection on the main track (DCC Main) and on the B-BUS (Booster-Bus). This can be used for systems on track N in particular. I guess all I can do then is set the slider to 'Fast' and see what the results are. I can only think that the speed of response is based upon a lower amp rating like several separate Circuit breakers such as PSX where different value settings are available and it was this I was just hoping to get an idea of. Oh well, never mind. Bob

Oh totally agree, that’s a fair wack to shell out so you want the very best for that kind of money and shouldn’t expect anything less. Bob

It’s rated at 8ohm so it should be fine. Bob

Hacked servos As these posts are being made in near real time, a day or so after the actual construction, comments made don’t always reflect what actually happens next, but in the case of the servos did reflect reality. When it came to making the servos up, (they had already been ‘hacked’ previously and just needed fitting into a unit with the DPDT switch), I discovered that it would be possible to make them so the servo (horn) arms – the double arm type - would sit in the hole cut for the slider switches and so could then drive brass wire/rods connected to the tie-bars in a similar manner to how I intended to do with the slider switches. Instead of ply I used thick plasticard as the unit basis. The brass wire used was 0.7mm. This I felt was small enough to be bent to give the V shaped spring form to absorb the excess movement over that of the tie-bar without being too thin and ‘bendy’ over the length of the runs. An area of concern was that being bent or flexed too much can cause such hard brass rod to fracture at the area of greatest stress, the tight bend for the V. Moved by hand they seem okay and I hope it stays this way over the long term because once wired up and tested they will be covered over and access will not exist unless the covering, the ballast/scenery, is ripped off…… At the moment then it’s a case of so far so good….and Tamiya tape has been placed over the channels to prevent any debris accidentality falling into them and causing problems down the line by jamming things up. Now it’s onto the wiring, a necessary job that I never find inviting. Bob

I don’t know what motor/gearbox combinations DJH make/made but Tony Wright seems to hold them in high regard on his thread and using them when he can. Perhaps you could enquire there to get a general consensus. Bob

Point Tie-bars I have read that there are probably as many tie-bar designs in 2mm as the number of those modelling in the scale. That helps to illustrate I think the difficulty many such as myself find in coming up with one that is useful with different types of track construction. My particular requirements are to have ones that aren’t too obvious and allow the blades to flex/pivot so they sit firmly up against the stock rail yet don’t put undue strain on them or the tie-bars. Mainly down the years I have used under-sleeper types rather than under-baseboard ones with tubes in which rods soldered to the blades can twist/pivot. So similar in principle to the under-baseboard designs, but closer to the blades to try and prevent the flexing of the rods and tubes that can occur. But all these types can be a hassle to make and install. Now Exchange Yard sidings is mean to be not only small but simple to construct as well as operate. So I have been trying to make some equally simple tie-bars. An alternate type of tie-bar I have used is a PCB sleeper turned on it’s edge, with two small holes drilled at the right distance to take fine wire loops that are soldered to the blades. The copper around these holes is cut away to prevent them being soldered up solid. Having the sleeper vertical reduces it’s size impact while the loops can twist to allow the blades to flex. The only downside is the sleepers are still quite thick and a slot needs to be dug to allow them to move sideways under the rail. The depth under the rail in 2mm is roughly 1.2mm while a standard sleeper is 1.8mm wide and 0.85mm thick. Having gone to the trouble of making track with individual chairs I wanted to try and keep these tie-bars from looking too obvious yet be fairly robust. What I decided I needed was thinner PCB that was just the 1.2mm depth. So I thought I would have a go at using some 0.35mm thick double-sided PCB I had for loco chassis construction which I could cut to the right depth. Would they be too thin and fragile? Only one way to find out…. My attempts used 5amp fuse wire in 0.4mm holes at 8mm centres with a total length of 14mm. I cut isolating gaps offset from the middle on each side so they wouldn’t weaken the tie-bar too much. They have now been fitted, look quite decent, and seem robust enough. The wire was looped through and trimmed off at the bottom. Because the PCB was thin I didn’t cut away the copper at the loops in case it weakened them too much. They still seem to work okay with the blades seating nicely against the stock rails. In this shot, with nothing to hold the tie-bar in position, the blades are sitting in the mid-position. Having got these fitted I decided that perhaps I would just go with using DPDT slider switches to move the blades via brass wire rods running in channels cut in the cork. Doing this would be easy and simple while the wiring needed would be minimal. I placed the switches I intended to use on the board to see if their position were feasible and then cut the holes needed to sink them into place. Fitting one in and testing it by pushing the slider back and forth I was then reminded why I had changed to using hacked servos on Priory Road and Tendring. With a very light baseboard, as my layouts are and Exchange Yard Sidings is in particular, the forces involved often tend to cause the baseboard to move, there not being the mass there is with heavier boards to resist these. So I am now thinking of using hacked servos if I can work out how to do so with this tie-bar design. It was with this in mind that I then decided that in order to fiddle about with this idea I needed the pointwork laid properly in place. Looking at it afresh I then took the plunge and laid all the track built so far. Doing so by fixing down the track, still on the paper template, with wide double-sided tape. I thought it was worth trying out this method. Normally I would use white spirit/turps to soak off the paper template and then glue the track down. But with the plastic chairs on ply sleepers this can lead to sleepers, particularly the slide chair ones, coming away and needing re-fixing which can be awkward and troublesome to do. Leaving the track on the template solved that issue. So I cut the paper around each piece of track, treating the pointwork as one unit. Then I laid each piece separately. I found it quite quick and easy to do. The result is all I could have hoped for. The track is down very firmly. Indeed so strong is the bond I doubt I could shift it even if I wanted. So I’m glad I made sure it all went down in the right place since the moment it hit the tape it was fixed in the position instantly. No messing around with pva of some kind and having weights on the track while it went off. The electrical connections have now been made through the baseboard. Droppers added to the feeds provided with the pointwork. All these will get hidden/covered when the ballasting is done. The rest of the plain track can be added when I have more chairs to hand but for now I can try and work on fitting the hacked servos and getting them moving the point blades. I have no idea how to do this at present. I’m sure a plan will emerge as I make up the hacked units….. Bob

Looking through from the beginning it’s interesting to see how the plans are now totally different from how they started out and all the better for that. With regard to the points on the girder bridge how are they to be operated? You may need to move them off it towards the fiddle yard to be able to do so either manually or using point motors etc. Bob

As may be seen I've now changed the layout's name. Since there won't be anywhere on the layout that it features it's probably a moot point, but it's helpful in referring to it. Having finished the pointwork as far as I can take it at the moment I decided to make all the plain track. This started off well until I discovered I'd miscalculated how many chairs I had against how many I needed and this all hit the buffers. So a small order to shop1 has been made and in the meantime I will get on with trying to sort out the fiddle board/sector plate. This is going to use Easitrac bases, some of which I have left in stock. The very ends will use pcb sleepers and etched chairplates to ensure strength and height matching with the exit tracks, which will also use the same. In fact all the sleepers from the end of the bridge will be these, so the short lengths of track on the start of the fiddle board as well. These will also be used for the electrical connections. For the plain tracks in the sidings the connections will be made under the buffer stops, when they are fitted, so nothing hopefully shows. At this stage I am still totally unsure as to what method of tie-bar and point control will be used. I keep thinking through the basic options. 1. Totally mechanical using DPDT slider switches at the baseboard edge with a bit of brass wire rodding let into the cork and a visible tie-bar - I have used in the past sleepers turned vertically on their side fitted with soft-iron wire loops. I worry there isn't really the spare space for the switches. This would though all be quick and easy to install and simple to use. 2. My under-baseboard tie-bar system, which I have spares of, along with hacked servos, again which I have plenty of spare. A small panel with four switches would need to be fitted. Three for the points, one to turn off track power in the event of a short - running against a point! - which needs the power from the DCC system to change and can't be achieved with the track power on and a short cutting it all off. Have I explained that well enough? The concern with this is whether the pointwork could take the tie-bar system. The pcb sleepers being soldered to the rail gives all the strength needed, but the plastic slide-chairs probably don't. 3. The hacked servos with the pcb sleeper tie-bars. Not used these two in combination before. This might be a good compromise if I can work it out. and the prime candidate at present. However nothing can be tried until the rest of the plain track has been made. So time to think it all through. Here's the complete layout sat on the place it is primarily meant to be used on, the portable workbench. When in use I will remove the cutting mat/s so it has as wide a base support as possible. Bob

There is no ready-to-lay 2mm 2FS track, I think there might be quite a few people using it if there were! Peco track is 9mm N gauge, either code 55 or code 80. Both are flatbottom. Code 55 is 'finer' than code 80. British Finescale produce N gauge Bullhead in both N gauge and 2FS which looks far better, but these are kits not RTL.

Could I ask if this is for a pair of gates, and whether you already have a design to work them. It’s just that I think you will need cranks with a large throw to get reasonable speed movement, not too fast, and especially if they are to be worked mechanically and/or by hand rather than servos. The late John Watson’s design is a good one to use, which I have in 2mm. Just involves a fair bit of DIY. Bob

Is that the sound of experience I hear Ian ? Too solid even when not wanted 😁 The only problem is I prefer not to ballast until it’s all been up and running for a while and thus fully tested. I also use Woodland Scenics ballast and scenic cement which while it does hold it in place allows it to be scrapped away fairly easily. I am thinking that if I lay the track/paper combo using pva then this may soak through the paper and grab the ply sleepers. There are already a few lifting and not being firmly held in place on the paper so plenty of weights to hold it all down evenly in the correct places will be key. I already have one rail joint where the rails don’t line up vertically since the pointwork was originally finished yesterday. As yet I don’t know why this is so as this isn’t due to lifting sleepers. Investigations are ongoing ….. Bob

Building the track Well the pointwork has been basically completed and appears to be satisfactory. Much better than my previous attempt so far, although there is along way to go till the track can be properly tested under working conditions. For my second attempt at using the Easitrac plastic chairs on ply sleepers I thought that I’d follow the general principles that I have used in the larger scales. Use a few key attachment points to which the rails could be soldered to give strength and location combined with supplying the power. When finished half chairs are fitted to cosmetically disguise/hide them. I think following a method I am familiar with has helped to get a better result. Previously I struggled to get the track to hold gauge and consistent flangeways with checkrails that worked as they should. The locations I use are the first past the last slide chair, so the two rails, the stock and closure, are bonded together electrically and this also gives strength to the closure against the twisting forces involved when the blades are moved back and forth. The others are under the crossing nose and the sleeper behind it where the wing rails end. These again both support the crossing nose and bond the whole lot electrically which of course changes polarity depending on the throw of the points. All the turnouts are A6’s, but only one is straight, the other two being contraflexed to differing degrees to fit the track design. An aspect to note is that while it is often stated that an ‘A’ switch has 5 slide chairs, a ‘B’ 6, and a ‘C’ 7 and so forth, there are actually another two slide chairs of a different type fitted before the first fixed chairs. So using ‘A’s the location I bond them at is sleeper 8 from the point tips. Now of course you can’t solder to ply, plus the rail needs to be held above the sleepers by the same amount as the chairs do. In 4mm I used copper rivets to do both, provide a solder point and raise the rail away from the sleeper. For 2mm I decided to try and use the Versaline etched chairplates normally used with the pcb sleepers, but drilling them 0.3mm in their centre to take soft iron wire soldered into place. With a matching hole drilled in the ply sleeper the wire is threaded through so the plate sits on the top and the wire then bent over and pressed (squeezed with pliers) into the underside and run to the edge and beyond. This then retains the plate on the sleeper at a fixed point and provides the means for electrical connection. The sleepers themselves are cut from 1/32 ply which is just about the same thickness as the pcb type. It was a slow process using butanone to glue the chairs in place. You can see I marked the template with different coloured dots to remind me where the different chairs went. This helps when threading them on the rail. This construction was done on the workbench on a printout from Templot with the sleepers held in place on the plan with two thin strips of d/s tape under the rail line. A digital multimeter was used to keep checking the electrical connections remained good as the soldered track joints were made. A bespoke roller gauge was used, one made on the lathe some years back. This differs in that it has two square flanges at flangeway width (0.5mm) and wheel flange depth (again 0.5mm) set at the track gauge. The resulting look of the trackwork is pleasing even in it's raw state. As the three turnouts were together in a line I decided to try and make them as one conjoined unit for ease of laying on the baseboard. They will be laid first, and all the plain track fitted after as it's easier I find to 'adjust' plain track for alignment if any small errors creep in. This is my standard method of laying such track. The plain line track will also be produced using the chairs on ply sleepers to keep the look consistent. How all this will actually be done is still being worked out. This is because aspects like tie-bars and how they will be operated is still to be decided. There are a few options and I am unsure as to whether I will remove the trackwork from the paper template or glue it down as it is. I have read of others doing it this way, or even building trackwork directly onto the baseboard, but up until now I have always removed the track from the template and then laid it onto the cork. This can make it tricky as sometimes the slide chair timbers come loose. Leaving the paper in place seems easier, and especially in 2mm but I only tacked the sleepers down with the two thin d/s strips so I'm wary as to whether this may cause issues. Bob

If you are prepared to stick to Farish bogie diesels and DMU's then quite easy and simple using those parts produced by the association. They suit any Farish from the Poole era up to the latest spec to arrive. If you are not sure which to use then just ask on the VAG, ZAG, or here. There aren't drop-in sets for Dapol diesels at present, but I have read that some individuals are working towards producing these for the future. Bob