First and Last Shunting Puzzle

[MyRule1]

As I mentioned in my "new member" post I have 10 months in which to complete three projects. This is due to a house move which will require some down sizing. Having been a armchair modeller for many years I have accumulated enough stock and material to make all three layouts at minimum cost,

 

Two of the layouts are simple tail chasers (N & OO) to enable me to run reasonable sized trains. The subject of the thread is a OO gauge shunting puzzle type layout. So the intention is to post each stage on here for comments, encouragement and criticism.

 

So to the beginning....

 

In the past I have had a number of abortive projects - often due to the baseboards. Much as I would like the have a professional made one they are not within my budget.

 

 I have three options:

 

From the previous attempts I do have two 4' x 2' traditional baseboards, The problem is that the new home will probably not accommodate a eight foot layout.

Another project produced a 3' x 1' 6" board which may be too small.

 

So I am in a Goldilocks situation...

 

One potential area of salvation is a skip rescue:

 

 

I have three pieces of insulation which when put together give a 7' x 2' area which can be cut down, I have read other comments on RMweb about the use of such material and as it is light it would be easy to more to the new house. No issue about moving it as I have access to the LWB Transit.

 

Assuming I go ahead I now need to look at dimensions. I cannot go for my ideal layout as the trains would be too long (thus the two tail chasers) so idealy I would like to be able to run:

 

1. Passenger train into a station and run round - current stock based in J15 and two Thompson suburban coaches although other regions are available. As my user name sys this is very much a Rule 1 layout, I just want to run my accumulated stock,

2. Usual shunting puzzle of three sidings - so minimum of 0-6-0 plus three wagons and guards van in and same length out,

 

Loco's on the layout are all DCC so running round could be avoided by use of a pilot engine. I have both the Sentinal and USA tank from Model Rail as my smallest engines.

 

The should be space on the board for some scenic additions - more of which anon. I have a fair amount of track from set-track points, through to double slips.

 

This evening I should get time to try some potential track layouts out. This will be for size rather than practicability,  

Edited May 21, 2019 by MyRule1

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Go for it - it ought to be possible in 7' x 2' (OO gauge by the sound of it) to develop a plan that offers both the run-round (1.) and Inglenook Shunting Puzzle (2.), but I would certainly encourage getting out the track pieces and some rolling stock to see what works and looks right.*

 

As for baseboards, I've come unstuck at that point too - I think the key to overcoming is to have a plan you really want to develop to give the motivation to push on past that point (at least, that's the basis I'm working on).

 

* the definition of "looks right" in this context being what you want it to be, of course

[MyRule1]

On 21/05/2019 at 15:05, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Go for it - it ought to be possible in 7' x 2' (OO gauge by the sound of it)

Sorry did not make clear - OO

 

Started playing with track and feel that a run round that I am happy with and at least 2 siding in the fiddle yard does stretch things a bit far. Anyway using pilot loco's on DCC's does make things operationally more interesting,

 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

18 hours ago, MyRule1 said:

Sorry did not make clear - OO

 

Started playing with track and feel that a run round that I am happy with and at least 2 siding in the fiddle yard does stretch things a bit far. Anyway using pilot loco's on DCC's does make things operationally more interesting,

 

Thanks for the reply - I realised after I'd posted that it was my rushed reading of the opening post: it does say OO gauge shunting puzzle.

Are you including the fiddle yard within the 7' length (some do, some add on space for a "fiddle stick" or loco lift as an extra)? I agree a run round and fiddle yard for two coach trains will be tight in 7' - I've tried many times to crack that one in similar spaces. Sounds like DCC is giving you an alternative. Will be interested to see what you settle on. Keep having fun, Keith.

[MyRule1]

Things have moved on greatetly since I started this thread, not least a move of house with the potential for a large fixed layout. This is covered in my Exercise Meteor thread. The building of that layout awaits the completion of an outside room.

 

Therefore I am returning to the shunting puzzle. This will now be a more traditional shelf/plank layout. I have reviewed m stock of track and found the following that will not be used on Operation Meteor.

 

Double slip

Three way point

2 X short Y points

 

All Peco streamline.  I have searched the Internet and can find only two references to shunting puzzles with a double slip point. Neither have a track layout. I will have a play with layouts and post my ideas but any ideas how I might best use the above track?

 

Scale OO and length 4 - 5 foot width up to 2 foot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ighten]

I had the same issue with  Tunstead (which is in this forum somewhere) which is a scenic diaroma - goods yard - Inglenook style with an extra headshunt.. For a shelf layout the run around really was pushing things and it looked too tightly packed - I also felt it important especially in 00 that when space is ltd you can still have an illusion of space by not cramming every available inch with trackwork..

 

I was just about to do an update so will share one reflection I was thinking of this morning and that was if I started again I would just give myself an extra inch or two between the backscene and the track - I got a little too carried away with the idea of having space at the front of the layout but now have track almost up to the backscene so I am going to copper the Canadian Boomers method of having vertical scenic treated areas that just sit in front of the backscene to add a little depth.

 

The three way should be useful for saving space, it did appear in my first plans I think but I shied away when I looked at the wiring lol

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ighten

[MyRule1]

Thanks @Ighten I have found Tunstead here:

 

Your track layout with the three way point is very close to one of my possibilities. Learning from you I am certainly going to experiment with the electrics using set track before going too far forward. I had  not considered the issues about uncoupling on curves. Good these lessons have been learnt before progressing.

 

 

[john new]

10 hours ago, MyRule1 said:

Things have moved on greatetly since I started this thread, not least a move of house with the potential for a large fixed layout. This is covered in my Exercise Meteor thread. The building of that layout awaits the completion of an outside room.

 

Therefore I am returning to the shunting puzzle. This will now be a more traditional shelf/plank layout. I have reviewed m stock of track and found the following that will not be used on Operation Meteor.

 

Double slip

Three way point

2 X short Y points

 

All Peco streamline.  I have searched the Internet and can find only two references to shunting puzzles with a double slip point. Neither have a track layout. I will have a play with layouts and post my ideas but any ideas how I might best use the above track?

 

Scale OO and length 4 - 5 foot width up to 2 foot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The LSWR used double slips in goods yards. The main line station I grew up near, Shawford, had one as an example. I also know that there was one in one of the yards at Barlby, near Selby, as it got recycled onto the NYMR back in the ‘70s. IIRC York Area group got that one shifted; someone on here will no doubt have a plan showing if it was ex-mainline or from always private sidings. (BOCM?)

[ManofKent]

Track density is very subject related - quiet branchline you probably want very low density, but some busy major good yards were very track dense as were some mainline termini. It's the same with curves - industrial facilities sometimes used track with a tighter radius than even set-track 1, but you want sweeping curves for mainline operations.

 

I'm not brave enough to try wiring double slips or three way points, but then I'm a DC dinosaur. 

 

What couplings are you using?

[john new]

From practical experience recently I am finding the modern small t/ls don’t like Settrack curves. The older large ones are better.

[MyRule1]

1 hour ago, ManofKent said:

What couplings are you using?

Not sure at the moment - the cheap option is obviously standard Hornby/Bachmann hook but I did purchase some kadees for testing. One problem is some of my rolling stock does not have nem sockets.

 

I have not mentioned that this will be DCC operated.

[ManofKent]

11 hours ago, MyRule1 said:

Not sure at the moment - the cheap option is obviously standard Hornby/Bachmann hook but I did purchase some kadees for testing. One problem is some of my rolling stock does not have nem sockets.

 

I have not mentioned that this will be DCC operated.

Even with NEM pockets I understand you can have issues with with differing heights. I'm only going to be running half a dozen wagons so the cost shouldn't be too great, but I think the fitting and alignment could still prove challenging. I do like what I've seen of them in operation though...

[Ighten]

For Inglenooks the tension locks are a real pain in the ----- .. I tried using the magnetic close couplers which look great when coupled and closed the gap prototypically but the magnets are just tooooo strong..

 

Kadees have the advantage of being simple lift to separate even if you dont want to automate them.. You  can get NEM or ones with pockes

Edited May 1, 2021 by Ighten