Help with 00 layout for a small board

[JohnR]

Tony, the OP gave the board dimensions in cm - and 97cm is actually just over 38 inches. Might not sound like a big difference, but an extra inch is very important with these small schemes.

[stannyblade]

 

 

Overview with coal staithes small station.JPG

Traction, 

Can I ask what make your bridges and tunnels are please?

[MrsMallard]

I wonder if Mrs Mallard has read any of our musings?

 

What does she think?

 

Does she actually exist, or is she an invention of the moderators, here only to spark a conversation?

 

Will Young Master Mallard get the layout of his dreams?

 

I think we should be told.

 

K

 

Ha! I am definitely real, just not been able to get online much this past week, Master Mallard has been poorly  

 

Thank you all so much for all your help and advice. Master Mallard is thrilled with the layouts that have been suggested. My Dad is coming over tonight to do some more measuring and see if we can perhaps make it slightly wider. Also looking into the hinged board option, we may have space if we re-jig his bedroom layout.

 

As soon as we know for definite the size of the board then we can work out which layout to use and order the track accordingly. Another question though, could anyone recommend a controller to start him off? Would a Hornby controller work with the Peco track mentioned?

 

Thanks again

 

K

[Zomboid]

So long as the track is metal, any controller will work with it.

Make sure you get stuff to match the locos though. If he's got a digital controller and a dc loco the best that will happen is nothing at all.

 

Personally I'm using a Hornby controller from about 1990, so others will have better recommendations, but if you're starting from a train set, that will have a controller in which will do the job. You'll need a second one if you have two circuits.

[Nearholmer]

Hello,

 

I trust that The Duckling is restored to full health.

 

A very good controller can be had from Gaugemaster http://www.gaugemaster.com/controls.html , their Model D being a good bet for a double-circuit. They aren't cheap, but they are very well built, and I've never heard of one coming to the end of its life. I'm using a 25 year old one in full expectation that it will will keep going for another 25 years.

 

For these purposes you can assume that any controller will work with any make of track or train.

 

One complication to think about is that the one I've pointed you to is a "traditional" analogue controller, known as a DC controller. It will control a train backwards, forwards, fast and slow.

 

There are also digital control systems, the most common using a format called DCC. Trains need to be fitted with a digital decoder to work with these, and this allows control of all sorts of things beyond speed and direction. Lighting and sound being the usual 'next steps', but it can lead on to oodles of sophistication, things like automating the control of the layout from a PC, remote control from an iPhone, remote control of a layout over the internet etc.

 

If you think that Master Mallard might turn out to be a bit of a technophile, you might want to go for such a system from the start, with a view to expanding it later, but beware that, like all such "tech", it might be subject to obsolescence ....... What you buy now for an eight year old might turn out to be "yesterday's news" by the time he is old enough to really exploit its cleverness.

 

If you live near a good model railway shop (they are few and far between!) they should be able to show you the options, or try to get to a MR exhibition and get layout owners to talk with you about the pros and cons.

 

Kevin

[imt]

Unless Grandad is good on electrics too, when you have decided on the layout you may want to ask some more advice about how to wire it up to best effect.  This is NOT complicated - just best to get right lest something or other gets burnt out.

 

Zomboid is right.  You say he has some locos already, please carefully check the boxes to see if they are DCC (usually in blue on the box) or not.  He may already have a controller of some sort?

 

Some quick checks and simple advice may avoid disappointments later.

 

Sorry - Kevin got there first.

Edited June 16, 2016 by imt

[traction]

Traction, 

Can I ask what make your bridges and tunnels are please?

 

Hi, they are all Scalescenes.

 

Mrs Mallard,

 

Do you have any locos already?

Do you have a controller for these already?

 

Traditional DC or DCC?

 

Sorry lots of questions but this depends on which way you go, if you do have some locos already, some model shops will convert them for you if they are not DCC READY

Which basically means they have a socket inside, you take the body off and plug a decoder into it, job done.

Some older locos are not DCC ready and need the decoder soldering into the wiring.

 

There are of course DCC fitted.

 

In answer to your question the Hornby controller, be it DC or DCC will work with the Peco track.

As will Hornby or Bachmann locos work with different controllers and track.

 

Cheers

 

Ian

[TonyMay]

If you think that Master Mallard might turn out to be a bit of a technophile, you might want to go for such a system from the start, with a view to expanding it later, but beware that, like all such "tech", it might be subject to obsolescence ....... What you buy now for an eight year old might turn out to be "yesterday's news" by the time he is old enough to really exploit its cleverness.

 

 

Kevin

 

DCC is a standard set by the NMRA, and as such is unlikely to be declared obsolete soon.  The DCC standard means that a DCC chip from one company will work with a controller from another.  What should happen is that chips ought to get smaller (and cheaper), and add-ons such as sound more common, and locos more likely to come "DCC-ready" and not require a chip soldering inside them.  The standard though is fixed, and in such common use that all future equipment should be backwards compatible.

[Nearholmer]

Tony

 

I used the word "might", and I notice that you use the word "should", which implies that, no surprise, neither of us feels confident to predict with absolute certainty what will happen in the future.

 

The reason that I think that DCC as we know it might become obsolete (no timeframe specified), is that the way that information is carried over the controller-to-decoder link is, I think, unique to the model railway application. There are other, closer-to-universal arrangements, and as small-scale, low-criticality, remote control and monitoring for all sorts of other applications becomes much more common, I wonder if model railway applications might get subsumed into "something used for nearly everything", which has such a big market that the bits can be supplied dirt-cheap. The model railway specific part would then only be the specific interface application for the controller (probably what we call a 'mobile phone' as default).

 

How far 'backward compatibility' could be sustained along such an evolution path? Depends how much money is spent on retaining backward compatibility.

 

Anyway, speculation a long way from a starter-layout!

 

K

 

PS: did a bit more delving today, and, yes, there is already a group working on use of more universal/generic kit as a potential successor to DCC.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Brinkly]

I quite like that GWR plan from 1985. Does anyone have any more information about it?

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

[JohnR]

I quite like that GWR plan from 1985. Does anyone have any more information about it?

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

Do you mean Bredon? It appeared in the September 81 and July 85 issues of RM.

[ejstubbs]

 

I quite like that GWR plan from 1985. Does anyone have any more information about it?

 

Do you mean Bredon? It appeared in the September 81 and July 85 issues of RM.

 

Where both GWR and LMS locomotives are shown running, and even one in BR livery.

 

Mr Wood didn't specify in his article which railway it was meant to represent.  He does say that it grew out of his son's first train set featuring a Mainline J72, and the article also says: "Present motive power consists of two J72's and a Collett 0-6-0."  It was in the later 1985 colour photo feature that an LMS 4F appeared, along with a pannier tank and a Flying Banana.  There is also a tantalising glimpse of this loco:

 

 

I'm sure someone will know what it is immediately.

 

Regarding the station building, Mr Wood says: "This is based on the ERIC plan but altered to suit the layout."  (I am ignorant as to what the ERIC plan might be.  Anyone know?)  The article does state that the engine shed is based on the one at Bodmin Road.

 

There's no doubt that the layout has a GWR feel, but it seems that the owner wasn't particularly fussy about what he ran on it!

[Nearholmer]

Looks like a terrier to me.

 

But, Bredon shouts "GWR!" In terms of infrastructure, notably signalling and signage.

 

K

[DAVE1562]

Might be worth looking into......http://www.classicbaseboards.co.uk for folding baseboards...

[Brinkly]

Do you mean Bredon? It appeared in the September 81 and July 85 issues of RM.

Yeah, I quite like it.

[wagonman]

Where both GWR and LMS locomotives are shown running, and even one in BR livery.

 

Mr Wood didn't specify in his article which railway it was meant to represent.  He does say that it grew out of his son's first train set featuring a Mainline J72, and the article also says: "Present motive power consists of two J72's and a Collett 0-6-0."  It was in the later 1985 colour photo feature that an LMS 4F appeared, along with a pannier tank and a Flying Banana.  There is also a tantalising glimpse of this loco:

 

 

I'm sure someone will know what it is immediately.

 

Regarding the station building, Mr Wood says: "This is based on the ERIC plan but altered to suit the layout."  (I am ignorant as to what the ERIC plan might be.  Anyone know?)  The article does state that the engine shed is based on the one at Bodmin Road.

 

There's no doubt that the layout has a GWR feel, but it seems that the owner wasn't particularly fussy about what he ran on it!

 

 

'Eric Plans' were landscape format books of drawings produced by Peco (?) back in the day. The structures drawn were mostly/all GWR. All this from memory – I have a set of them somewhere but not seen in maybe 20 years!

[Nearholmer]

http://britishrailwaybooks.co.uk/books/ISBN/0900586486.html

 

Front cover seemed instantly familiar, although I've never modelled the GWR in my life; we must have had a "club copy".

 

K

[RJS1977]

If I was building a layout for the space outlined by the OP, I'd be inclined to add on an extra 2-4 inches (exact increase in width depending on whether Hornby or home-made platforms were being used) and go for something like this:

 

Plenty of operating potential as trains would start in the long bay platform, lap the outer circuit at will, cross to the inside, reverse, lap at will before crossing back to the outside and terminating where they began. A loco would then come out of the storage spurs on the left of the plan to take the train out again. The released loco (if a tender loco) would follow a similar route to be turned on the reversing loop before heading for the spurs.

 

I had intended to use sectional track throughout, however the geometry of the points on the reversing loop required flexi track to be used in the ovals in places to ensure everything lined up.

 

Alas probably a little too complicated electrically for a starter layout. Had the space available been a couple of inches longer, it would have been possible to take the reversing loop off the outer loop, cross the inner loop on a diamond crossing and rejoin the inner loop on the other side of the baseboard. As well as eliminating a lot of reverse running, if the inner and outer loops were on separate controllers, it would have simplified the wiring for the reversing loop considerably.

[TonyMay]

If I was building a layout for the space outlined by the OP, I'd be inclined to add on an extra 2-4 inches (exact increase in width depending on whether Hornby or home-made platforms were being used) and go for something like this:

 

Plenty of operating potential as trains would start in the long bay platform, lap the outer circuit at will, cross to the inside, reverse, lap at will before crossing back to the outside and terminating where they began. A loco would then come out of the storage spurs on the left of the plan to take the train out again. The released loco (if a tender loco) would follow a similar route to be turned on the reversing loop before heading for the spurs.

 

I had intended to use sectional track throughout, however the geometry of the points on the reversing loop required flexi track to be used in the ovals in places to ensure everything lined up.

 

Alas probably a little too complicated electrically for a starter layout. Had the space available been a couple of inches longer, it would have been possible to take the reversing loop off the outer loop, cross the inner loop on a diamond crossing and rejoin the inner loop on the other side of the baseboard. As well as eliminating a lot of reverse running, if the inner and outer loops were on separate controllers, it would have simplified the wiring for the reversing loop considerably.

 

"Alas probably a little too complicated electrically for a starter layout." - Yes.  Reverse loops are not a great idea electrically, particularly with DC as you need isolating sections and switches to avoid short circuits.  Beginners should avoid them for that reason and because they don't add much to the layout, are not very realistic, and bring reverse curves into play.  Also, if you've got two circles of track then most of the fun is having two trains circling; you can't then have one of these cross over to the other circle if that other circle is occupied, so you defeat the object of having two circles.  Finally, you've also got 2 sets of facing crossovers on your circuit (whereas if we're going to be a bit silly one of these ought to be trailing to allow a train running wrong line to cross back over).

 

I can understand the point of being a bit silly and toylike and trying to have maximal fun, but I think it's best to be a little cautious the first time you do something, and to keep things simple.

[MrsMallard]

Your are correct, I had put the size down from my N-gauge layout!

You also threw me by putting everything down in imperial!

 

All of the Hornby train sets come with 3rd radius curves.

All of the Bachmann sets have 2nd radius curves.

I looked in to this when I did my thread "So you're going to buy a train-set." link below:-

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/98047-so-youre-going-to-buy-a-train-set-update-18072015/

 

 

This is using 1st and 2nd radius curves on the 180cm x 97cm baseboard size:-

 

OO 180x97 size plan.jpg

 

 

It's really just to give an idea of what you can get on that size board.

The inner sidings can be made up to create a shunting puzzle, possibly a 5, 3, 3 with enough room on the head shunt for a SMALL loco and 3 wagons.

This could be taken down to a 3,2,2 with enough room in the head shunt for a Small loco and 2 wagons.

 

That would keep you entertained for ages moving them about, while still have locos running round the loops!

 

Cheers

 

Ian

 

Hi Ian

 

Thank you so much for this diagram, this is exactly what MM wants for his layout - 2 loops around and space in the middle for sidings/shunting. Please could you tell me how powering it would work and what products we would need to buy?

 

His engines that he already has were passed down to him, he has a Thomas, Percy, Annie & Clarabel plus Mallard (his pride and joy!) and Flying Scotsman and assorted wagons/carriages. These were his Dad's so bought in the mid 80s. Thomas and Percy still work as we managed to try them on another track. Mallard and Flying Scotsman need some fixing so have just been on display on a shelf.

 

I am so grateful for everyone taking the time to answer my questions, thank you

 

MM x

[traction]

That's a million dollar question!

 

Not quickly or easily answered.

Firstly Your budget, and secondly, DC or DCC?

Can you solder, do you have a soldering iron?

 

The locos you currently have won't be DCC ready, so won't run on DC(well they will but its not advised)

They can be converted by soldering the DCC decoder inside them, which a number of shops will do for you for a small charge and the price of the decoder.

 

You could buy a train set, but the Hornby train sets come with 3rd radius curves which you wont be able to use!

Bachmann train-sets come with 2nd radius curves which are used in the plan for the outside loop, they also come with a loco, new sets have DCC ready locos so a decoder is easily plugged in, the set will also have a controller either DC or DCC, if DCC the loco will already have the decoder fitted.

 

I would personally go DCC.

Basically for a quick and simple start, buy the track(in the plan I've done I have left on all of the Peco part numbers so you can use them) a DCC controller, something simple and easy at first something like a Bachmann EZ command or Hornby Select.(Can be picked up cheaply off Ebay split from a set) or even second hand if budget is an issue.

Fit Hornby point power clips to all points(doesn't matter if you have Bachmann or Peco points the clips fit in the same place and do the same thing) connect two wires from controller to the track.

Have decoders fitted to your current locos, and away you go.

 

DC will involve section switches a controller for outer loop, another for inner loop&sidings.

I've never wired a DC layout so would need to think about it!

 

Once we get answers to the above questions most of us will be able to guide you further.

 

Cheers

 

Ian

Edited June 19, 2016 by traction

[MrsMallard]

We were looking at DC (either the Hornby HM2000 or GaugeMaster Model D) but now wondering if DCC would be the best way for him. Budget is quite flexible, we want to set him up with the basics then he will add accessories/extra trains with birthday/Christmas money.

 

It's definitely not a passing interest or phase (complete obsession since 18 months old) so we don't mind spending what is necessary to get him started. 

 

Don't have a soldering iron but i'm looking for a shop that could do it for us. Will the decoders be able to be added to such old engines?

 

Thanks x

[Zomboid]

It's possible to pay someone to fit dcc to old locos (or do it yourself, but if you've never soldered before it wouldn't be my first project), but you might want to compare the price of that against just getting new versions which don't need so much work. 1980s motors were pretty average, and modern ones are a lot better.

[traction]

We were looking at DC (either the Hornby HM2000 or GaugeMaster Model D) but now wondering if DCC would be the best way for him. Budget is quite flexible, we want to set him up with the basics then he will add accessories/extra trains with birthday/Christmas money.

 

It's definitely not a passing interest or phase (complete obsession since 18 months old) so we don't mind spending what is necessary to get him started. 

 

Don't have a soldering iron but i'm looking for a shop that could do it for us. Will the decoders be able to be added to such old engines?

 

Thanks x

 

If starting out with a new layout which can be expanded I think DCC would be the way to go personally.

If you get him a sound loco, be it a basic Hornby TTS sound or a full blown sound he will be very impressed!!

 

Yes you can get decoders to fit the older locos, its not getting the decoder that's the real issue, its how easy/difficult it is to fit it inside the loco and how much of the loco has to be altered to wire it in.

 

All you need to remember is with DCC you are controlling the individual loco, so once you have a decoder fitted in each loco, you give it a unique number, or its address.

using the controller, you select the address and control that individual loco, no other locos will move.

You can leave that loco running and then select another address to control another loco.

 

It really is a great way to drive the engines.

Yes you can also control the points by fitting point motors and accessory decoders, but that can come later and to be honest I prefer using the levers to operate the points seems more real.

 

When laying the track mark out the positions of the points so you can pre drill the hole ready for when you fit the point motors at a later date.

Initially switching them by hand won't be too much of an issue.

 

Roughly where abouts are you in the country, it will help to recommend shops to get your locos converted.

 

Cheers

 

Ian

[RJS1977]

"Alas probably a little too complicated electrically for a starter layout." - Yes.  Reverse loops are not a great idea electrically, particularly with DC as you need isolating sections and switches to avoid short circuits.  Beginners should avoid them for that reason and because they don't add much to the layout, are not very realistic, and bring reverse curves into play.  Also, if you've got two circles of track then most of the fun is having two trains circling; you can't then have one of these cross over to the other circle if that other circle is occupied, so you defeat the object of having two circles.  Finally, you've also got 2 sets of facing crossovers on your circuit (whereas if we're going to be a bit silly one of these ought to be trailing to allow a train running wrong line to cross back over).

 

I can understand the point of being a bit silly and toylike and trying to have maximal fun, but I think it's best to be a little cautious the first time you do something, and to keep things simple.

 

In an ideal world, I would have gone for this, but it was about 4" too long:

 

 

However I realised that if the restrictions on length are due to the legs of the bed getting in the way, it might be possible by cutting the corners off the board to slide it in at an angle and then turn it slightly, so that the extra 4" slots between the legs of the bed.

 

Operationally, both versions of the plan *do* allow for more than one train to run at once, provided the trains can be held within the reversing loop (or, in the case of this plan, overhang the diamond crossing slightly). Imagine Train 1 in the inner loop (anticlockwise) platform, Train 2 in the outer (clockwise platform) and Train 3 in the bay platform:

 

Train 2 runs from the outer platform into the reversing loop and stops.

Train 3 runs from the bay platform to the outer loop platform.

Train 1 runs from the inner loop platform to the bay platform.

Train 2 joins the inner loop.

 

The loco on Train1 is swapped over and trains 2 and 3 circulate in opposite directions until it's time to change all the trains round again.

 

This plan is much simpler electrically than my previous one because the reversing loop can be split between two controllers, avoiding the short circuit issue.

 

Edit - as to why I included a reversing loop at all - when I was a kid, my layout had two termini facing onto a continuous run in the same direction, which meant that once a train had come out of a station, it had to keep running in the same direction then propel itself back into the terminus, which always seemed a little out of place. Since then I've always looked for a way of incorporating either end-to-end or out-and-back running into plans.

Edited June 19, 2016 by RJS1977