SouthdowN

[fender]

The Why

 

I've been wanting to start an N gauge layout for some time now, mainly in order to scratch two particular modelling itches which I feel my current layout, Small Plymouth Goods, cannot relieve.

 

The main one of these is that I cannot model what I see every day. Modelling the steam era is a joy in so many ways, but there are also things I feel I miss out on. Therefore, this new project will be a modern-day layout, based in the SE of England, as that's where I live.

 

The other itch is the inability to use RTR or RTP products. Modelling a specific place in an non-RTR gauge (P4 in my case) means that I do a lot more modelling but do not get that satisfaction of buying a product for a purpose and putting it straight into action. I'm constantly disappointed by reviews of products in the modelling press that I cannot take advantage of.

 

Hopefully this layout will, along with my other, mean I get something of the best of both worlds.

 

N gauge is the natural choice as space is somewhat restricted and, since I have no permanent place for a new layout, the boards will be vastly lighter for the same or similar track plan in OO.

 

The Layout

 

Initially this will be just one board of 6x1ft, or 180 by 30cm as I like to measure it. I've gone back and forth on this for a while, but concluded that 30cm wide is sufficient for a simple track plan, and the length is not an issue as it will be stored on-end. I do intend to add more boards in the future, meaning this will have a modular aspect to it, but the size I've selected initially should mean I can 'finish' the first board relatively quickly and then move on to others while still enjoying what I already have.

 

Here is the track plan I've come up with so far:

 

 

It is not set in stone but is more or less what I'm after: A terminus which can have working signals, a siding/wash line which adds a little bit of other interest. Perhaps the wash line will lead onto the next board in the future for a small EMU depot. You could say this is a vastly simplified version of an Eastbourne or Littlehampton...perhaps. Anyway, south coast-ish in the sun.

 

The Rolling Stock

 

My first purchase has already arrived: A Farish Class 350 Desiro!!!  This was easy, since everybody knows that the Desiro is a very common sight on the Southern network it is a lovely model and is very inspiring just by itself.

 

"Hmmm..", I wondered, "how can I justify this model?". "Easy!", I thought, "Obviously it has been a case of the Southern had some problems with their normal rolling stock and had to draft in a Class 350 (or two, I might buy another one)", which is technically true since, there are no models provided by anyone of modern Southern EMUs!!!!!!!

 

Therefore, please refer all complaints over the use of the Class 350 (on third rail I might add) to Bachmann/Dapol!

 

I do have my eye on the forthcoming Farish Class 171, which is of course not an EMU, but will come in Southern livery(!), which should look the part. I might consider the older model although it is hard to chip.

 

Another possibility is the Class 319 in Thameslink (well, if I can run a Desiro!), which I'm quite excited about.

 

I know there are various 3D-printed/bodge/hack-RTR-chassis options, and I'm not saying no, but it's not the idea of this layout. I'd rather crack on with it and hope Bachmann/Dapol bow to relentless pressure from consumers.

 

Not too many other options, for this module anyway. Maybe a engineers train being stabled.

 

But stock is not really the point, for me. I'd rather have a slightly wrong train coming in to a Southern-looking environment than model somewhere else that I'm not familiar with.

 

That's the plan anyway!

[croydon junction]

Looks good, but for a while class 350 units were used on southern rails, I think on the milton keynes service. Good luck, hope it goes well!

[fender]

I've come up with a name for it: Southdown, which I was surprised to discover does not seem to exist as a place in the SE. Seems appropriate given the proximity of the South Downs.

 

Also, I've ordered some colour light signals having found a great discount on some Berko ones. Littlehampton seems still to have semaphore signals, but the price and ease of the colour ones meant I went for them.

 

Perhaps getting ahead of myself, buying signals before wood!

[fender]

built the first part of the baseboard frame, I believe in the 'Barry Norman' style:

 

 

considering track: I had planned on using code 55 throughout, but a look through the finetrax website has got me thinking about that as well. only problem is it's all bullhead, but not sure that will be noticeable in N. really looks like a nice product though.

 

any thoughts welcome.

[SRman]

Class 350/1 units had third rail pick up shoes and the necessary DC underfloor modules, all covered correctly on the Bachmann OO models, so I assume the Farish versions would also be correct.

Electra Railway Graphics do vinyl overlays to convert the 350 to a 450; I have used the OO scale ones but I'm sure Adam also offers these in N.

 

When I saw the title of the thread, I was expecting to see Southdown buses! It does seem to be a good name for a fictional station, though. I like it.

[fender]

thanks very much for that SRman, I hadn't heard of that firm. I will look at their offerings more closely as I didn't even know this type of product was available!

 

------

 

after some thought I am leaning towards using plain-old code 55 track as it is more in keeping with the philosophy of the layout. I'm going to print out a few templates of both those and finetrax and play around with them first though. If I do use code 55 the idea is to use code 40 for the third rail, which should look the part I think.

[nick_bastable]

built the first part of the baseboard frame, I believe in the 'Barry Norman' style:

 

 

considering track: I had planned on using code 55 throughout, but a look through the finetrax website has got me thinking about that as well. only problem is it's all bullhead, but not sure that will be noticeable in N. really looks like a nice product though.

 

any thoughts welcome.

flat bottom rail is available as a easitrac option in 2mm,  for plain track it can be used with n gauge stock and points although if you modelled p4 full  2mm should not be a problem

 

Nick

[fender]

Thanks Nick.

 

I've been thinking about this for a while now and have concluded that I should stick with code 55, for this board anyway. I can always alter things for the next board and try out other track options. This has been a difficult decision as track is probably my favourite thing about railways, but I am already getting my 'track' fix through my other layout, and since the purpose of this one was speed of build and operation, code 55 make the most sense.

 

thinking about the track plan some more, I've come up with a slight adjustment which puts the track in a better position for the next board and also eliminates the effect of the crossover. having a curve just before the station like that does require some modeller's licence, I know, but I think it will improve the way the trains look as they arrive and depart. old plan below, new above:

 

[stivesnick]

Hi Fender

 

One feature of designing modern layouts is to think about how the track plan was 40-50 years ago - there was a lot more of it!

 

So, one way to justify the curve in the track is to imagine that in the past there were more platforms at the station and that they are either disused or the land sold off and a new structure (shopping centre perhaps?) has been built in its place. An alternative would be a former engine shed. I have always liked the idea of turning a former turntable into a local park and the old engine shed into a trendy café / antiques shop etc.

 

Hope this helps

 

Nick

[fender]

Hi Fender

 

One feature of designing modern layouts is to think about how the track plan was 40-50 years ago - there was a lot more of it!

 

So, one way to justify the curve in the track is to imagine that in the past there were more platforms at the station and that they are either disused or the land sold off and a new structure (shopping centre perhaps?) has been built in its place. An alternative would be a former engine shed. I have always liked the idea of turning a former turntable into a local park and the old engine shed into a trendy café / antiques shop etc.

 

Hope this helps

 

Nick

 

certainly does! I was thinking along similar lines but couldn't think of a good enough reason. the intention from the start was that there was once a lot more track and a bigger station, but I had envisaged that being on the other side of the platforms. I like your idea a lot better. in fact, looking at the plan, you could imagine that there was once another platform on the near side of the current one as the approach track would then have run more or less straight into that. shopping centre is a good idea too. I had intended to have some modern towny scene in the front area but hadn't decided on what exactly. I'll have to think more on how to achieve that.

 

to clarify, the viewing side will be from below the plan. this will allow viewing of the signals as trains depart, as well as putting the train more 'in the landscape' (even though the board is only 1ft wide!) One feature I like on layouts is when the trains are not completely centre-stage but you have to look around stuff to see them, as in real life. this does mean that whatever is in the front has to be good though!

[stivesnick]

Fender

 

Glad you like the idea.

 

I would also be tempted to curve the tracks at the back to increase the distance between railway and backscene. Assuming the layout can not be made wider, there is not much space at present and you will be left with a series of low relief buildings. Although you can vary the height, there is not much you can do about the constant width.

 

Anything you can do to improve this will make the final effect much more realistic.

 

Nick

[SRman]

The new plan is good in that it also eliminates several reverse curves and improves the smooth 'flow' of trains with less end-throw on each coach.

[jpendle]

If you're going Network South East rather than strictly Southern you should Google Revolution Trains and check out their CL321

 

Regards,

 

John P

[railsquid]

The Layout

 

Initially this will be just one board of 6x1ft, or 180 by 30cm as I like to measure it. I've gone back and forth on this for a while, but concluded that 30cm wide is sufficient for a simple track plan

 

Being in the process of building an N gauge layout on a 30cm deep (and 210cm long) Ikea shelf, I'm still surprised by how much depth there actually appears to be, especially in combination with backscenes. It's a Japanese layout so not everyone's cup of tea, but some photos here to give an impression of what fits in the space:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129145651@N06/albums/72157663942541111

[fender]

Being in the process of building an N gauge layout on a 30cm deep (and 210cm long) Ikea shelf, I'm still surprised by how much depth there actually appears to be, especially in combination with backscenes. It's a Japanese layout so not everyone's cup of tea, but some photos here to give an impression of what fits in the space:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129145651@N06/albums/72157663942541111

 

thanks, and great looking layout!

 

yes, regarding the area at the back, I'm not 100% sure yet. I had envisaged a row of narrow trees/hedges with a fence, perhaps as might be at the side of a road (not modelled), which would hardly take up any space, and then an appropriate backscene picture. I might curve one of the sidings at the back though to give a little more space.

[fender]

some good progress today as first I received a couple of boxes from Liverpool containing some goodies, and then finished the woodwork part of the baseboard. I placed a few bits of track in a hurried fashion to see how it might look:

 

 

I still have to paint/stain it, as I like to have the wood protected. the top will be brown but I'm going for white for the rest of it to make it less dark and obtrusive, also to aid in wiring etc underneath.

 

one thing I haven't done yet, which I originally planned to do, is fit cross bracing underneath. now that the top is on the frame I'm not sure it's necessary. the width the wood (9mm ply) spans is only 24cm (although 170ish lengthways) and the wood hardly moves if I press hard on it. perhaps it's still a good idea though. so far it weighs just 5.3kg, so nice and light.

[SRman]

Cross-bracing is a good idea, but one advantage of putting it in after putting the track down is that you can make sure it doesn't interfere with any point motors.

[fender]

baseboard done:

 

 

I did put in the cross bracing (after careful examining of the plan)

 

that's enough photos of baseboard production!

 

I next did a 'sound' test using my test track and found it to be acceptable. these light models don't make enough noise to warrant cork I don't think.

 

 

and finally a comparison picture or two:

 

 

I've also joined the 2mm association as they have a few items that will be useful and I may make my own track on a future board. I must say I have been impressed with what is on offer so far.

[nick_bastable]

welcome to the darkside       

[fender]

not sure why it is but there is some kind of illusion with the concrete flexitrack that makes the rail height look even more overscale. I'm going to have to do a few experiments to see how it performs with various kinds of ballast. I can probably get away with quite a bit of timber-sleepered track though.

 

also need to experiment a lot with the third rail. I'm going to try flatbottom code 40 as I think this will look the best. the problem is how to attach it as I don't like the insulated-joiner method. I'm thinking drilled holes in the sleeper, small section of plastic or brass rod and then gluing to the rail, but not sure how effective the glue will be with such a small contact area. I think soldering would be very difficult to get right without making a big mess! but generally I think this is the way to go as gluing things on top of the sleepers will be very difficult with the concrete track. I'll try a few ideas when the code 40 rail arrives.

[nick_bastable]

not sure why it is but there is some kind of illusion with the concrete flexitrack that makes the rail height look even more overscale. I'm going to have to do a few experiments to see how it performs with various kinds of ballast. I can probably get away with quite a bit of timber-sleepered track though.

 

also need to experiment a lot with the third rail. I'm going to try flatbottom code 40 as I think this will look the best. the problem is how to attach it as I don't like the insulated-joiner method. I'm thinking drilled holes in the sleeper, small section of plastic or brass rod and then gluing to the rail, but not sure how effective the glue will be with such a small contact area. I think soldering would be very difficult to get right without making a big mess! but generally I think this is the way to go as gluing things on top of the sleepers will be very difficult with the concrete track. I'll try a few ideas when the code 40 rail arrives.

treat yourself to the track book by the 2mm association well worth the money

 

check out

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/990/entry-15476-dabbling-in-3rd-rail-in-2mm-finescale/

 

and 

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1033/entry-10187-ill-third-that/

 

I have gone the hard route soldered track to mini pins   

 

Nick

 

edit pp spelling

[fender]

treat yourself to the track book by the 2mm association well worth the money

 

check out

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/990/entry-15476-dabbling-in-3rd-rail-in-2mm-finescale/

 

and 

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1033/entry-10187-ill-third-that/

 

I have gone the hard route soldered track to mini pins   

 

Nick

 

edit pp spelling

 

thanks Nick.

 

I already have the track book (it's great). I've read about the track-pin method but I'm not sure my soldering skills are up to scratch. hopefully my experiments with the fb track will point me in the right direction!

[nick_bastable]

thanks Nick.

 

I already have the track book (it's great). I've read about the track-pin method but I'm not sure my soldering skills are up to scratch. hopefully my experiments with the fb track will point me in the right direction!

easier than you think a touch of flux on the pin and rail a hot Iron with a dab of solder and its done push down when the whole rails formed ( trust me I tested it for the book and my solderings cr@p) more important you can clean the track afterwards as it is very robust

 

Nick

[fender]

some track experiments for myself coming up, which I thought I might as well put here in case others are interested. I wanted to see just how well the connections would be covered up and also what the concrete code 55 looks like when ballasted vs the wooden sleepers.

 

I have to say, I am amazed at how good this code 55 is, as hopefully the pics below will show:

 

 

the last one is with droppers attached, although isn't the clearest photo

 

 

^^^droppers invisible

 

 

^^^rali joiners invisible

 

imho, this system is far better than OO gauge track, where it is almost impossible to disguise the rail joiners. obviously the track will have been painted on the finished article, and the ballast will be less uniform, but I'm quite happy with the appearance so far. the ballast also doesn't look too overscale to my eyes. it is woodland scenics fine ballast and I see only a few example of lumps that are a little too large, most of it looks fine (no pun intended)

[60012 Commonwealth of Australia]

V

 

some track experiments for myself coming up, which I thought I might as well put here in case others are interested. I wanted to see just how well the connections would be covered up and also what the concrete code 55 looks like when ballasted vs the wooden sleepers.

 

I have to say, I am amazed at how good this code 55 is, as hopefully the pics below will show:

 

 

the last one is with droppers attached, although isn't the clearest photo

 

 

^^^droppers invisible

 

 

^^^rali joiners invisible

 

imho, this system is far better than OO gauge track, where it is almost impossible to disguise the rail joiners. obviously the track will have been painted on the finished article, and the ballast will be less uniform, but I'm quite happy with the appearance so far. the ballast also doesn't look too overscale to my eyes. it is woodland scenics fine ballast and I see only a few example of lumps that are a little too large, most of it looks fine (no pun intended)

 

Very nice!

Now that my soldering is much (Incredibly so) better, I'm going to pull part of an N scale layout I started years ago (1940s GWR) and maybe finish it! 

Or I might start a new one (god forbid!)

 

Peter