Jump to content
 

Plan for first serious layout - need your thoughts.


OnTheBranchline
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
On 19/02/2019 at 14:12, Zomboid said:

Yeah, that was the idea. Shouldn't be a problem for a while as you're at the younger end - though maybe you need to consider if anyone else is going to come round for operation sessions.

 

Here's a superb MS Paint sketch of what I was getting at (freehand curves with a trackpad are rubbish - who knew?). The whole thing needn't be more than 8 feet deep. You'd need access into the middle of the dogbones as well for retrieving the inevitable derailments.

OTBsketch.png.d9df04a60d827b8b77e2e87c1f308f14.png

 

That's not a bad design to be honest, I would rather shorten the length by a foot or two so I can walk around to the side rather than crawl under.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 19/02/2019 at 15:07, The Stationmaster said:

re the US style of layout the larger ones tend to involve multi levels and relatively steep gradients which suit US market diesels but aren't so suited to UK steam outline locos.  And the peninsula idea - very common in some US layout designs - needs space to get decent radii although in the US they are working to a slightly smaller scale.   So some US layout design influence was there as I saw your basic outline.  Not saying it won't work but it won't work anything like as well for British outline models where you need much shallower gradients and/or magnetic assistance.

 

But back to where you stand and more importantly moving forwards.  Apart from thinking about curvature etc as I mentioned above the first thing you have consider is exactly what you want your layout to portray.  you've got backs of linear space so think how you want to best use it.  As it happens I think your original idea on your sketch was a great starting point - don't forget that the more tracks you add the more constrained, shorter, it will appear to the human eye.  A single line over that distance will look like a long layout and will trick the eye into thinking that;  double line won't look so long; and adding addition lines will shorten the distance your mind thinks it's seeing.  Double track station plus a loop sounds ideal as it will create a spacious effect (assuming that might be what you want?).

 

Next how do you fit what you want into the space you are allowed.   Here comes an important decision - do you want a continuous run (makes sense for single handed operation) or do you want end-to-end fiddle la yard/staging to fiddle yard/staging?  and assuming you could actually enjoy working with the latter (single handed?) could you run the sort of train frequency you would like to run?   Important questions to settle before you start creating any sort of plans.  Or do you go for a mixture and, say, add you branch line terminus to a continuous run giving you something of both worlds.  Can you make the layout footprint wider (towards the stairs) in the middle and follow the Upton Hanbury idea or do you go for a variant on Harlequin's helix idea (they consume a huge amount of space especially if you want sensible gradients and radii but they can get you down much lower for your storage/fiddle yard area).

 

These have to be your decisions not ours but I would suggest staying with your existing idea, or a close variant of it,  for that main central linear space - and a continuous run will offer an awful lot if you can work one in.

 

Right now I am going in between a continuous single line running with just scenery and not much else, or a double track main line with or without a rural station. I will likely be the only operator for the vast majority of time.

 

I think my original plan was a bit ambitious. I would like an engine shed/coach sidings/freight sidings eventually but it's all conjecture at this point. Maybe expanding into the basement bedroom.

 

I think right now, ditching the storage lines underneath might be the best idea. The reason I wanted it is that I didn't want my stuff to sit in boxes and to at least be on rails in some way.

 

On 22/02/2019 at 19:42, The Stationmaster said:

Churston is a good one because of the loco variety it offered as well as the traffic variety and it good reasonably be compressed without losing too much of its atmosphere.  Bourne End was another example of a junction on a single line although the loop was quite long and the station building was more extensive than Churston, it offers the big advantage over Churston of legitimate mainline diversions and excursion traffic passing through worked by an interesting variety of 'foreign' locos although that was probably mainly post 1948 - including a Brighton Atlantic on one occasion. 

 

Devizes was a non-junction, wide variety of traffic and most types of loco (I'm not sure if 'Kings' were allowed without checking, 47XX were definitely permitted) but it occupied a lot of space with a large yard although it had the advantage of having a tunnel at one end - useful for scenic purposes perhaps?  Again another station with huge potential for handling diverted trains, as happened in the real world. A compressed version of Devizes might not be a bad idea or alternatively take various features from several of these stations and blend them together.

 

Several stations on the Par-Newquay branch come to mind as well and of course they saw big engines in the Summer peak plus an interesting mix of clay and more general freight traffic.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, Junctionmad said:

Can I add my tuppence based on my own experiences 

 

(a) run away from gradients especially with steam outline , you really need 1 in 100 and even them it has its problems 

 

(2) don’t have hidden fiddle yards , they are a nightmare , in fact any hidden track is so. 

 

(3) don’t go under 30” radius  in OO, preferably don’t do under 36 “ , nothing screams toy trainset more then unrealistic tight curves 

 

(4) if yuh like complex track , fire away , be prepare to spend lots of time building it all. And it can look incredibly toy train 

 

(5) always base your track on some form of derivative of a prototype or have a very good working knowledge of how railway companies planned track , I’ve seen some awful examples of toy train configurations over the years 

 

(6) if roundy roundy doesn’t fit , don’t try and squeeze one in 

 

make the whole thing removable and potentially self standing , you never know .....

 

(7) double the estimated time to build it and add your weight /3 

 

Please give an example of a specific layout, so we can all know what you are referring to.

 

5 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The Fishguard boat train was a Canton turn with a Castle, loco changed at Cardiff, and AFAIK the only 'down line' turn that was considered to merit a clean low-mileage loco.  A Brit would be by no means impossible on the job.  Castles ran to Pembroke Dock, Neyland, and Milford Haven as well.  Fishguard shed had Halls.

 

KIngs at Cardiff were only permitted the use of platform 1 on the up and 3 on the down, due to clearance issues over the cylinders at the eastern ends of platoforms 2 and 4..  As Hippo says, they were a short term replacement for the Britannias at Canton, though the shed had been asking for them for years, arriving in 1961when the Brits were all sent to the LMR, and all gone at the end of the winter timetable in '63, replaced by Hymeks which were hardly adequate but nothing else was available until the Westerns started to arrive and the Brush Type 4s made an appearance.  

 

Kings were only allowed to access Canton shed by the main inlet and outlet roads, not carriage siding inlet or outlet or Leckwith ground frame as they were prohibited from those roads over Clare Road bridge and over Leckwith Road bridge.  Their trains had to be brought up from the carriage sheds by pilots for them, and disposed in the opposite direction.  It was common to see one standing on the loco spur off no.1 goods road next to platform 1 at the eastern end, overlooking the Saunders Road station approach.

 

The Milford Haven fish train was another Canton Castle turn, but did not warrant a clean one!

 

If you are looking for places to run big GW/WR locos on express trains with restaurant cars and including the likes of TPO and sleepers, West Wales is more fertile territory than Cornwall!

 

I've noted this for reference. Do you have any other examples of runnings for West Wales?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OnTheBranchline said:

 

Right now I am going in between a continuous single line running with just scenery and not much else, or a double track main line with or without a rural station. I will likely be the only operator for the vast majority of time.

 

I think my original plan was a bit ambitious. I would like an engine shed/coach sidings/freight sidings eventually but it's all conjecture at this point. Maybe expanding into the basement bedroom.

 

I think right now, ditching the storage lines underneath might be the best idea. The reason I wanted it is that I didn't want my stuff to sit in boxes and to at least be on rails in some way.

 

 

 

Maybe I'm wrong, but it sort of sounds to me that you really don't know what you want (or perhaps you don't know what part of the hobby interests you) and you are sort of allowing a large space and a large(ish) collection of model dictate the layout instead of what interests you.

 

Are there any layouts (not necessarily of British prototype) in your area where you could operate on and see what actually interests you?  Either a club or a home layout?  It is often surprising the number of people willing to welcome fellow modellers in to try things out and that may give you a better idea of how you want to proceed.

 

Failing that, perhaps a small layout (like the 2x6 currently being discussed) with not a view of being terribly accurate for your rolling stock but being a small layout to experiment on with the view of either eventually throwing it away (or giving it away/selling it) when you decide what you want for a larger layout - of course assuming you still want a larger layout when the time comes.

 

[edit]

 

Perhaps even just some plywood, perhaps 2x6 or 2x8, where you can get some track, temporarily put it down, and play for a couple of months with a mocked up engine shed, then re-arrange the track to represent a goods yard and play with that for another couple of months, etc.

Edited by mdvle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Right now I am going in between a continuous single line running with just scenery and not much else, or a double track main line with or without a rural station. I will likely be the only operator for the vast majority of time.

 

I think my original plan was a bit ambitious. I would like an engine shed/coach sidings/freight sidings eventually but it's all conjecture at this point. Maybe expanding into the basement bedroom.

 

I think right now, ditching the storage lines underneath might be the best idea. The reason I wanted it is that I didn't want my stuff to sit in boxes and to at least be on rails in some way.

Now , this could be a great layout , a good space to see mainline trains ploughing through the scenery etc , without the complexity of any sort of large station .  Lost of scenery work , so you need too be happy with that 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, OnTheBranchline said:

Right now I am going in between a continuous single line running with just scenery and not much else, or a double track main line with or without a rural station. I will likely be the only operator for the vast majority of time.

 

I think my original plan was a bit ambitious. I would like an engine shed/coach sidings/freight sidings eventually but it's all conjecture at this point. Maybe expanding into the basement bedroom.

 

I think right now, ditching the storage lines underneath might be the best idea. The reason I wanted it is that I didn't want my stuff to sit in boxes and to at least be on rails in some way.

 

You might want to hone your skills on one module or element which you could incorporate later in a bigger scheme.  I built a 1x3 demo when I transitioned to P4.  It was a scenic exercise on a lightweight open construction board.

 

IMG_0070.JPG

IMG_0071.JPG

IMG_0072.JPG

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

 

You might want to hone your skills on one module or element which you could incorporate later in a bigger scheme.  I built a 1x3 demo when I transitioned to P4.  It was a scenic exercise on a lightweight open construction board.

 

IMG_0070.JPG

IMG_0071.JPG

IMG_0072.JPG

 

Good advice there. Dioramas, small modules or micro layouts are perfect ways of testing techniques, learning new skills and refining out abilities. Importantly, they're also achievable and manageable and are not overwhelming in the way larger projects can be. It doesn't have to be a stand-alone either, it could be small part of you intended larger layout or a module to slot into the larger scheme. 

 

You could always lay a simple oval to run trains and start on one small scenic board at a time using this approach.

 

David 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, OnTheBranchline said:

 

Right now I am going in between a continuous single line running with just scenery and not much else, or a double track main line with or without a rural station. I will likely be the only operator for the vast majority of time.

 

I think my original plan was a bit ambitious. I would like an engine shed/coach sidings/freight sidings eventually but it's all conjecture at this point. Maybe expanding into the basement bedroom.

 

I think right now, ditching the storage lines underneath might be the best idea. The reason I wanted it is that I didn't want my stuff to sit in boxes and to at least be on rails in some way.

 

 

 

 

 

Please give an example of a specific layout, so we can all know what you are referring to.

 

 

I've noted this for reference. Do you have any other examples of runnings for West Wales?

 

Right - some sort of basis is perhaps beginning to emerge.  I think you now have three important decisions to make (or maybe even four), viz -

1. What sort of trains and locos (e.g do you want 'big' engines?).

2. Do you go for single line or double line,

3. Do you include or not include a station, and possibly

4. What period will you be modelling-

 

Now where do those decisions take you?  The only places you would find big steam engines (i.e.'Castles' and/or latterly 'Counties') on a single line would be -

the Maidenhead - High Wycombe branch (mainly diversions);   the Princes Risborough - Thame  - Oxford line (mainly diversions);    Colwall - Ledbury (booked services);    Patney & Chirton - Devizes - Holt  Junction (most likely diversion but 'Halls were regular and 'Castles' did get a look in);   the Kingswear branch (regular trains but mainly Summer Saturdays);   the Newquay branch (Summer Saturdays);  the Falmouth branch (but probably not very common?);   the final short branch from Johnston to either Neyland (regularly in BR times) or, to a much lesser extent, Milford Haven.  I can't off hand immediately think of any other (G)WR single line sections where you'd find large passenger engines such as 'Castles' and 'Counties' and some of the above would offer some nice scenic inspiration to draw on.  The only single line section which 'Kings' were permitted to work over in the above list was the Kingswear branch (and, without checking, probably some of the diversionary  routes).

 

If you went for double line the GWR world would be more or less your oyster for large engines but if you wanted to include 'Kings' as well (apart from their limited sojourn at Canton in their final days) the Berks & Hants or the Northern mainline (to Birmingham) would probably be the best places to look for scenic inspiration as they were the principal routes for the 'Kings'.

 

So the types of engine and trains you want might well decide whether you go single or double line and the part of the countries (England and Wales) you draw on for scenic inspiration.

 

Having got those choices sorted you then face a wealth of station choices or you could even go generic for track layout and pick particular building styles - but watch out for what might or might not have been on some of those routes as architectural styles varied.  But be warned reasonably 'open' station with sensible (but compressed) length platforms and a small goods yard is going to be at least 8 feet long using large radius Peco points and ideally should be nearer at least 10 or 11 feet.

 

Same with period - the big advantage if going into BR days is that 'Castles' in particular were more widely used while if you go to teh end of steam there were more single lines as routes were rationalised plus there are some very attractive WR diesels out there.  All depends what floats your particular boat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

the final short branch from Johnston to either Neyland (regularly in BR times) or, to a much lesser extent, Milford Haven. 

Sounds to me like Johnston would make for an interesting model, with the to single lines converging.

 

But I like that kind of thing - no idea if there's anything else interesting about the place though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

If the basic design is continuous then there are advantages to making it double-track:

  1. Double track doesn't take up much more room than single.
  2. More frequent activity. You don't have to wait for the line to clear before running in the other direction.
  3. Two trains running at once, passing and re-passing each other in different places, makes simple train watching more interesting.
  4. You can leave one running while you, or someone else, operates the other.
  5. More prototype locations to choose from, as Mike said above. (This can be useful even if you're modelling somewhere fictional.)

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

 

You might want to hone your skills on one module or element which you could incorporate later in a bigger scheme.  I built a 1x3 demo when I transitioned to P4.  It was a scenic exercise on a lightweight open construction board.

 

IMG_0070.JPG

IMG_0071.JPG

IMG_0072.JPG


Thank you for the idea. How did you build that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here goes.

 

I decided on trackbed height above baseboard bottom, 8 inches I think it was.  I cut the sides, ends, intermediate corners and trackbed from quarter inch ply (very cheap).  Then assembled using white wood glue, pins and square section to strengthen the corners and some of the edges.  When set it made a very rigid box.  Eighth inch cork underlay on the trackbed with beveled edge for the ballast shoulder.  Installed the tunnel mouth, road and bridge abutments.  Built up the contours over the formers using cardboard strips and masking tape.  Covered this with about a quarter inch of paper mache mix; amazing stuff, sets like rock but can be drilled for fence posts, trees, etc.  Added the track and wire droppers and ballasted.  Added fences and trees.  Added texture using flock, Woodland Scenics foliage, etc.  Painted the track and ballast.

 

And there you are.  Probably about 20 to 30 hours.

 

Here you can see the whole layout with the tunnel board in the distance.  9 feet by 30" at the station end.  A compact BLT.

station.jpg

DSC00858.JPG

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
21 hours ago, Zomboid said:

Sounds to me like Johnston would make for an interesting model, with the to single lines converging.

 

But I like that kind of thing - no idea if there's anything else interesting about the place though.

Some very interesting signalling equipment as the GWR installed continental style double wire operation of various points during rationalisation of the signalboxes in 1935.

 

(Double wire operation made it possible to mechanically work points further from the signalbox than was normally permitted and avoided the cost of conveying points to motor operation using a hand generator.  It would appear that Johnston was chosen by the GWR to assess the use of double wire working of points.)

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, OnTheBranchline said:

Would trying the Cakebox Challenge be a good first step?

 

It would be a good choice for trying out scenery / structure building, being small enough to be achievable even to a novice and should be relatively cheap and thus less worry about making mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
  • RMweb Premium
On 19/02/2019 at 14:12, Zomboid said:

Yeah, that was the idea. Shouldn't be a problem for a while as you're at the younger end - though maybe you need to consider if anyone else is going to come round for operation sessions.

 

Here's a superb MS Paint sketch of what I was getting at (freehand curves with a trackpad are rubbish - who knew?). The whole thing needn't be more than 8 feet deep. You'd need access into the middle of the dogbones as well for retrieving the inevitable derailments.

OTBsketch.png.d9df04a60d827b8b77e2e87c1f308f14.png

 

What about four feet deep?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...