inglenook Langley Yard

[jbmccarthy]

I have decided to start on my layout project. Due to soon new arrival to the family, I have decided to keep it as small and contained as possible. The apparent path of a micro layout, based on the classic inglenook shunting puzzle. The size will be 2.5 feet long, by 16 inches, this will be purely the scenic area. Attached will be a separate fiddle yard. The layout will be made up of a single point. However, two tracks will leave the layout into the fiddle yard, with one track being the five wagon. while the two other sidings being able to hold three wagons. The headshunt would have to be the fiddle yard, with the second point generally within an inglenook being off the scene. However, the fiddle yard will just be a traverse allowing me to easily slide the loco and three wagons to and from each entry track.

 

I generally have no idea what I'm doing but plan to use this thread to ask for help and learn where I possibly went wrong. I hope to update this thread as much as possible, and really look forward to the journey I'm about to take. 

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

[jbmccarthy]

This weekend I'm hoping to make a start on the scenic section baseboard. For the supports under the plywood is there any benefit to using a mitre joint over a but joint? Also thinking of counter sinking the screws into the frame. I'm probably going to go for the mitre first and see how that plays out. But any suggestions would be helpful. Also fixing the plywood to the frame, what's considered best practise screwing it or nailing it?

[Jerry1975]

Hi.

 

This sounds interesting, I'm no carpentry expert but I just make a simple under baseboard support with 2x1 inch supports but joined and further support every foot to prevent sagging, I then screw and glue the backscene to to rear under baseboard support ( hope your following this ok, I'm not the best at explaining things ).

 

Also countersinking the screws is a good idea.

 

I look forward to seeing / reading more.

 

Jerry.

[Booking Hall]

This weekend I'm hoping to make a start on the scenic section baseboard. For the supports under the plywood is there any benefit to using a mitre joint over a but joint? Also thinking of counter sinking the screws into the frame. I'm probably going to go for the mitre first and see how that plays out. But any suggestions would be helpful. Also fixing the plywood to the frame, what's considered best practise screwing it or nailing it?

 

For my baseboard frame I just butt jointed the ends and mid supports, glued and screwed them. I also glued the plywood top and secured it using annular ring shank nails, which give a very secure grip.

[47137]

This weekend I'm hoping to make a start on the scenic section baseboard. For the supports under the plywood is there any benefit to using a mitre joint over a but joint? Also thinking of counter sinking the screws into the frame. I'm probably going to go for the mitre first and see how that plays out. But any suggestions would be helpful. Also fixing the plywood to the frame, what's considered best practise screwing it or nailing it?

I think the modern wood glue is so good, butt joints will be fine. I usually go for pins and glue nowadays instead of screws ... it is easier to hide the heads and also you can prise it apart if you need to make changes. I don't think there is a 'best practice' as such because baseboards come in so may shapes and sizes. I do fix my own backscene boards onto the baseboard, and the L-shaped angle formed helps hold everything in shape. Also a fixed backscene can hold a dust cover.

 

- Richard.

[jbmccarthy]

Hi, so the last couple of years have been difficult since the little one came into our lives. So this project had to be placed on hold, you can see when the thread was started. I'm pleased to say we are all through the problems now, and I can revist the idea of a small shunting layout. I hope to share progress with you all soon. I'm still on step one which is make the basedboard.

[jbmccarthy]

So I have spent the last 24 hours looking at baseboard kits, due to my lack of confidence in woodwork. I have come across two possible providers. Firstly there is ScaleModelScenery who provide a baseboard kit that fits inside a useful 77-litre box. This seems like a fantastic idea for storage with a little one and a couple of cats. The only downside is that I was keen to have a layout 4 foot by 1.5 foot. But for ease of use, this is still a major consideration.

 

The alternative was a baseboard kit from Tim Horn, as they are highly rated. However, the website seems to be down for maintenance and his facebook page doesn't seem very active. So was wondering if he is still operational?  Anyone here knows if this is the case?

 

Also, I would like to know if there are any other providers of baseboard kits that I could add to the list to investigate further?

[alant]

I have never used them but aware of Grange & Hodder who do baseboard kits:

 

http://www.graingeandhodder.co.uk/store/c1/Featured_Products.html

 

Alan.

 

Edited November 13, 2019 by alant

[jbmccarthy]

1 hour ago, alant said:

I have never used them but aware of Grange & Hodder who do baseboard kits:

 

http://www.graingeandhodder.co.uk/store/c1/Featured_Products.html

 

Alan.

 

 

Thanks for the suggestion. However, I feel that they might be out of my price range for the time being. Also, there is an added issue that their site isn't secure so wouldn't be entering personal details let alone banking information. So can't see any other way of ordering from them.

[sleepyrider]

I'm happy with my SMS board, if you make the shunting neck detachable a 2 3 3 Inglenook fits easily into the 77 litre box using streamline points (thus allowing live frogs for better shunting). 

When I looked there were better baseboard kits around, eg using ply rather than MDF, but they were much more expensive. With such a small area I don't think it will be a problem.

Worth noting I got 10% discount at SMS for signing up to their email list.

[jbmccarthy]

1 hour ago, sleepyrider said:

I'm happy with my SMS board, if you make the shunting neck detachable a 2 3 3 Inglenook fits easily into the 77 litre box using streamline points (thus allowing live frogs for better shunting). 

When I looked there were better baseboard kits around, eg using ply rather than MDF, but they were much more expensive. With such a small area I don't think it will be a problem.

Worth noting I got 10% discount at SMS for signing up to their email list.

 

Thanks for the heads up on the discount offer. I don't usually sign up for newsletters, defiantly worth it in this case. I'm seriously considering the SMS baseboard kit for convenience. I’m going to have to create a small traverser as the entrance of the layout will be two lines. By doing this I’m hoping to be able to create a 5-3-3 inglenook. However time will tell if this is possible, going to mock up on the physical baseboard once purchased.

[toplink@()1989))((]

One of the things that puts me off using a kit for a base board (aside from the price) is that you need to design your layout to fit the kit, now I know the manufacturers will build what you wish, within limits I guess, but bespoke things come with bespoke prices and what if you change your design at a later stage? Personally I would suggest that you design your baseboard/s break it down into component parts and take the resultant drawing/s to a local timber yard and get them to cut the ply/mdf etc to size to provide you with the parts, all perfectly square and to the shape you want ready to assemble.

 

Cheer's, Pete. 

[jbmccarthy]

1 hour ago, toplink@()1989))(( said:

One of the things that puts me off using a kit for a base board (aside from the price) is that you need to design your layout to fit the kit, now I know the manufacturers will build what you wish, within limits I guess, but bespoke things come with bespoke prices and what if you change your design at a later stage? Personally I would suggest that you design your baseboard/s break it down into component parts and take the resultant drawing/s to a local timber yard and get them to cut the ply/mdf etc to size to provide you with the parts, all perfectly square and to the shape you want ready to assemble.

 

Cheer's, Pete. 

 

While I agree that making your own boards is the best way forward. My circumstances require for the layout to put away every evening. Based on this requirement and the fact that I only want to create a small Inglenook, I have decided to go with a baseboard kit from SMS. The fact that the baseboard goes together in minutes, and fits within a well-defined and widely available container really suites my current requirements. However time will tell. I hope my next project to be grander in scale, which of course would require me to build my own baseboards.

[Chris Berry]

I'm following your topic with interest. Can't wait for the first photo !

[Bo-Bo]

IMHO I think SMS boards are really good and value for money, these are great especially if you have time restraints. Easy to build up and work with.

[jbmccarthy]

24 minutes ago, Bo-Bo said:

IMHO I think SMS boards are really good and value for money, these are great especially if you have time restraints. Easy to build up and work with.

 

Yes compared to other baseboard providers that are relatively inexpensive. Also the major convenience that they already fit in a widely available plastic box.

[jbmccarthy]

So I have been giving it some thought, and I have hit a bit of a road block. I have had a few false starts on creating a model railway before. Because of this I have stock and track for both n-gauge and oo-gauge. I really like both, so not really sure what Langley Yard will be. With n-gauge I like the idea of more space around the track for the scene to develop. While with oo-gauge I also like the idea of you being placed into the scene that this scale will give.

 

When I have purchased the board and have built it, I will probably mock the track just to get a sense of space and see how it feels. I would love to know what you think.

 

[jbmccarthy]

So I have attempted to use any rail to come up with some sort of plan. The track template is using the measurements of the SMS board modelling area, and Peco code 75 bullhead rail. The trains will enter from the left using either two of the rails. The front-most rail is where the train is assembled for the puzzle so needs to be able to hold either three of five wagons.

 

 

Looking at this image, I think that the inglenook style will be 3,2,2 which is a little disappointing as I wanted the traditional 5,3,3 combination. The back siding will be partially obscured as it will enter the factory building, while the middle one will be in the open, possibly with a canopy coming out to allow a drier working environment for workers.

 

On the left, will be a road overbridge with some drainage, which will then meet some low relief buildings making up the back scene. In this space, there might be a workman's hut and general yard debris. I would love to know your thoughts and get some feedback, please.

[Jerry1975]

I like your idea, still a lot of shunting possibilities with a 3,2,2 inglenook.

 

my layout is basically a small inglenook with an extra kick back siding added and it's fun to operate.

 

Looking forward to seeing further developments.

 

Jerry.

[jbmccarthy]

6 hours ago, Jerry1975 said:

I like your idea, still a lot of shunting possibilities with a 3,2,2 inglenook.

 

my layout is basically a small inglenook with an extra kick back siding added and it's fun to operate.

 

Looking forward to seeing further developments.

 

Jerry.

 

Yeah, you're right 3-2-2 offers lots possibilities. I'm just waiting to get my hands on an SMS board now.

[sleepyrider]

The Shunting Puzzles website works out the possibilities for 5 3 3 vs 3 2 2:

http://www.wymann.info/ShuntingPuzzles/Inglenook/inglenook-trackplan.html

See the 'Smallest Inglenook Possible' section towards the bottom.

Clearly the outcomes are far more limited with the smaller version, though still I feel much greater than many other designs of layout. In my case the smaller size offers other advantages however, especially the fact I have room to leave it set up so it's ready to go at the flick of a switch. The larger one would have to be put away each time. Comes down to individual circumstances I guess.

[bigP]

--

Edited February 1, 2021 by bigP
Deleted

[jbmccarthy]

So after much thought, I have decided to change the design of the layout. I will now be using n-gauge, as I have honestly preferred the overall appearance and like more space around the trains for the scene. This has the added benefit of me being able to add some more things. 

 

 

I have changed the entrance of the layout to enter form the right, and this will also be a single line. Allowing me to only have to have an additional shunting stick attached to the layout as I honestly don't think I could build a traverser. The line will exit out of the layout under a half road bridge, this road will continue off to the back of the layout. There will be an embankment coming down from the bridge that will meet the yard. The yard would be fenced off with simple wooden fencing, however, some panels will be broken as some young ones have come to watch some trains. Between the factory on the top left, and the fenced embankment on the top right will be the back of terraced houses, with small courtyard gardens with brick walls backing onto the yard. Between the houses and the track will be random items left by rail workers, and a make-do store for random industrial items used by the factory, as well as the compulsory rubbish.

 

The line at the bottom will be able to hold five wagons, I have based this off a tube wagon, which is a length of 70mm which leaves ample space before the point. What I like about this, is that it doesn't have to go all the way to the other end of the layout, which makes the whole thing feel less cramped.

 

Next is the small kickback siding, I have been looking at a few micro layouts on here, and liked the idea of having one. This siding will mostly be used to stable a small engine, while it's not on duty or waiting for another engine to take the formed train away from the bottom five wagon siding. There will be a small coal bunker, and maybe some sort of makeshift cover for the engine. 

 

The siding on the left in the middle will run alongside the factory, it is long enough to hold three wagons, again this was measures compared to a tube wagon. The outside of this factory could have some sort of loading bay, however, I'm not completely sold on the idea yet, it could just be a siding for wagons waiting to go into the factory loading area which is the top siding. The final siding which is the top left will run into the factory disappearing out of view, I'm hoping that this will give the illusion of more space on the layout, and provide some additional interest.

 

The only area left is the rather large gap in the bottom left corner. I haven't completely settled on what would be going here. There will be some sort of access the yard for the rail workers, possibly big enough for maintenance vehicles. Or it could be some additional industrial units. I'm open to ideas of what could go here.

 

How does this sound? Am I missing something, or can you think of something I could add or take away from this? 

[Jerry1975]

Hi,

 

Sounds good to me, the area bottom left, you could have a crossing for access and possibly some sort of yard office or possibly a unloading / loading area with a crane or fork lift truck or just a wide crossing and a low relief building bottom left that would go flush with the backscene if you have one, just some ideas.

 

Jerry

[CloggyDog]

Tim Horn is still very much in business, despite his website woes. Had a delivery from him within the past month. 

 

Ping him an email, I know he keeps the more popular boards in stock and his baseboards are top quality in both design and material and o together very easily.