Semi-Newbie seeks layout ideas, any/all helper welcome

[Aire Head]

Do you have an idea what size you want the trains you want to run will be?

[PioneerX]

19 minutes ago, Aire Head said:

Do you have an idea what size you want the trains you want to run will be?

 

Quiet frankly.......no, I have not given this any thought. I guessed it would be limited by siding/platform lengths (which might be why your asking) and given the fact I had no idea how to best use the space I also dont know what can actually fit

[Aire Head]

24 minutes ago, PioneerX said:

 

Quiet frankly.......no, I have not given this any thought. I guessed it would be limited by siding/platform lengths (which might be why your asking) and given the fact I had no idea how to best use the space I also dont know what can actually fit

It is quite a deciding factor! I tend to think about what I want to depict e.g mainline, secondary route or branch line. Then think about the traffic I would expect to see. Given your space I reckon you should be able to make am reasonable depiction of a mainline/secondary route with a comfortable 2 track loop around the room with space for 2 stations.

 

One train of thought I have considered for my own project  (one day!) Is rather than a fiddle yard is instead model a largeish station. Using the platforms as effectively a fiddle yard for my passenger trains and disguising the storage lines for the goods trains as refuge sidings. If there is any space you could model a good yard for handling local traffic.

 

On then opposite side of the room you could model a smaller station with a good yard to give you both somewhere for a train to go and somewhere to shunt the local goods.

 

I've got more I could write but I will let you digest that first and see if it makes sense in my appalling written English!  

[PioneerX]

@Aire Head, wow that's a lot to think about....thanks.

 

Maybe to add a bit more information.....much of what inspired me (while I was still considering N gauge) was found @ http://www.scarm.info/layouts/track_plans.php?ltp=162 with this layout....

 

 

....in fact I redrew this one several times trying to make it work but never achieved it. Essentially it's mostly industrial with lots of shipping possibilities...so I guess thats what I'm into really, although I swapped out the port for a canal transfer dock. This was not going to fit in N so certainly cannot be done in OO, however does have a lot of what I like. Hopefully some elements of this can be done in my available space.

 

In summary I guess I'm after industrial goods shipping rather than a passenger line. Although a passenger line passing through the scene on a loop adds nice diversity. To answer the train length question....lets say GWR local freight of say 4-10 cars ala...

 

 

[Titanius Anglesmith]

33 minutes ago, Aire Head said:

Given your space I reckon you should be able to make am reasonable depiction of a mainline/secondary route with a comfortable 2 track loop around the room with space for 2 stations.

 

One train of thought I have considered for my own project  (one day!) Is rather than a fiddle yard is instead model a largeish station. Using the platforms as effectively a fiddle yard for my passenger trains and disguising the storage lines for the goods trains as refuge sidings. If there is any space you could model a good yard for handling local traffic.

 

On then opposite side of the room you could model a smaller station with a good yard to give you both somewhere for a train to go and somewhere to shunt the local goods.

 

If I had the space that’s exactly what I would do  It’s as though you read my mind.....

[Aire Head]

36 minutes ago, Titanius Anglesmith said:

 

If I had the space that’s exactly what I would do  It’s as though you read my mind.....

 

Great minds think alike, but then so do lunatics 

 

As a further not to the above when I came up the idea I had in mind that the majority of the traffic would be heading through with any stopping trains being largely confined to the local passenger and goods trains. 

 

This was because I wanted to depict the Aire Valley Line in 1950s so wanted to be able to have big heavy trains heading to the S&C and beyond.

 

I will have a play around with a plan when I get home, I'm sure 10/12 wagon rakes will be easier to fit than the 20/30 I had in mind for my project to be!

[mdvle]

4 hours ago, PioneerX said:

My modelling station and 3Dprinter would need to be put on wheels and moved into the operating well when in use, but that's not  big sacrifice to get the extra benchwork in.

 

Not against a modelling station on wheels, but I personally would make sure that it doesn't require setup/putting away of materials in order to use it / put it away again on the basis that too much hassle to use could end up discouraging use.

 

Walking into room, pulling out modelling station and in 10 seconds getting to work on a project will be productive particularly if you only have 10 minutes spare time, but if you need to spend that 10 minutes getting everything back onto the top of the station you are less likely to use it.

Edited September 17, 2019 by mdvle

[PioneerX]

17 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

Not against a modelling station on wheels, but I personally would make sure that it doesn't require setup/putting away of materials in order to use it / put it away again on the basis that too much hassle to use could end up discouraging use - you are unlikely to pop in and do a bit of work on a model, or alternately run a train, if you first need to spend 5 or 10 minutes getting things set up and then dedicate an equivalent time to putting stuff away again.

 

Agreed, it;s a trade-off between dedicating space in the room for it and therefore reducing layout space vs something that can be pushed under the layout when not in use. It is one of the big reasons I put forward.....

 

 

....as an option. Given @Harlequin feedback about the operating well I did update this one to...

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by PioneerX

[mdvle]

Perhaps then the first step is to decide how much height your modelling desk requires, and thus whether it will fit underneath the layout in a convenient way?

 

Once you have decided that, then you know how much space can be dedicated to the layout.

 

Also perhaps decide, if you need a dedicated space, which side of the door you want the desk - if you will always have the door closed then it may not matter, but if you want the ability to leave the door open so that you can also keep an eye on things in the rest of the house then flipping the desk and printer/storage/layout might be a better option (assuming the desk fits on the left side given we don't know where the door is on that wall).

Edited September 17, 2019 by mdvle

[PioneerX]

1 minute ago, mdvle said:

Perhaps then the first step is to decide how much height your modelling desk requires, and thus whether it will fit underneath the layout in a convenient way?

 

Once you have decided that, then you know how much space can be dedicated to the layout.

 

Also perhaps decide, if you need a dedicated space, which side of the door you want the desk - if you will always have the door closed then it may not matter, but if you want the ability to leave the door open so that you can also keep an eye on things in the rest of the house then flipping the desk and printer/storage/layout might be a better option (assuming the desk fits on the left side given we don't know where the door is on that wall).

 

Technically a desk could go either side. The drawings are accurate and the wall gap on one side is more than on the other. The 'storage' as it is labelled now is actually 4 identical workbenches (https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/p/bekvaem-kitchen-trolley-birch-30240348/) beside each other and comprises my existing place for the 3D printer as well as where I do electronic work, all I have done is reduce it to 2 by putting two under the layout. I think for practical reasons this might be better than trying to use the entire circumference for layout work.

[chuffinghell]

Probably not what you're looking for but even with only three boards in a 'U' shape you could have a continuous loop plus a fiddle yard

 

Chris

[Zomboid]

You might get a "system" layout into that space if you go for a light railway or an industrial type complex, but main line locomotives pulling reasonable length trains from one place to another is going to be a squeeze.

[chuffinghell]

46 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

You might get a "system" layout into that space if you go for a light railway or an industrial type complex, but main line locomotives pulling reasonable length trains from one place to another is going to be a squeeze.

 

Maybe with a narrow gauge line running along side the mainline

[Aire Head]

Ok so I had a play around and managed to come up with a single track branch line with an industrial location of some description at the top which use an inglenook track plan and a station at the bottom utilising the timesaver shunting puzzle track plan for the goods yard. I also added an additional loop at the station side so that you could store a small branch passenger train there.

 

Naturally plenty more could be added but thought it might be a start 

 

Edit: you could in theory run a train on the loop at the same time as operating both shunting puzzles

Edited September 17, 2019 by Aire Head

[PioneerX]

13 hours ago, Aire Head said:

Ok so I had a play around and managed to come up with a single track branch line with an industrial location of some description at the top which use an inglenook track plan and a station at the bottom utilising the timesaver shunting puzzle track plan for the goods yard. I also added an additional loop at the station side so that you could store a small branch passenger train there.

 

Naturally plenty more could be added but thought it might be a start 

 

Edit: you could in theory run a train on the loop at the same time as operating both shunting puzzles

 

That looks like a great prospect, thanks

[Aire Head]

9 minutes ago, PioneerX said:

 

That looks like a great prospect, thanks

Thank you

 

Having slept on it I'd be tempted if you wanted a bit more going on to add an engine shed at the brand station so you can have more than 3/4 locos on the board or so you don't have to leave them lurking in the goods yard or always coupled to a train.

 

You could probably fit something else into the top right hand corner aswell for a bit more shunting if desired.

 

I do quite like the amount of free board space however as it does leave a lot of scope for scenic modelling which should create a train through the landscape feel

[Julia]

 

 

Looking at what you have available, have you considered moving the station more into the corner? Adding some curve to the station will make it look more natural, making it longer will allow you to run more prototypical train lengths. 

 

If you were to move the station that is currently at the bottom of your image, to the right, you could even fit in a small siding on the left by the curve to use as say a public siding, a destination for agricultural products, and an extra place to shunt stuff too. 

 

J

[Harlequin]

Random thoughts:

1. Less is More. Very simple track plans can be the most difficult/rewarding to shunt.
2. The wider the visible radii the more realistic the scene.
3. Convoluted Alpine trackplans do not look British.
4. The work bench and the printer might be better away from the door to avoid unwanted bumps and to allow you to simply stand up and leave rather than having shuffle furniture around.
5. A scenic fiddle yard means that the hand of god descends and knocks over people, breaks telegraph wires and nudges buildings (there's a whole meme about that on this site.)
6. A Timesaver shunting yard does not look like any kind of UK steam era trackplan I'm aware of.
7. A classic inglenook needs to be specifically 5:3:3 and the best way to lay one out is as part of an authentic looking goods yard. IMHO.
8. Full room circuits are a simple and foolproof method of just letting the trains pass by - and youngsters can safely be allowed to drive.

 

Edited September 19, 2019 by Harlequin

[Aire Head]

12 hours ago, Harlequin said:

5. A scenic fiddle yard means that the hand of god descends and knocks over people, breaks telegraph wires and nudges buildings (there's a whole meme about that on this site.)

 

6. A Timesaver shunting yard does not look like any kind of UK steam era trackplan I'm aware of.

 

7. A classic inglenook needs to be specifically 5:3:3 and the best way to lay one out is as part of an authentic looking goods yard. IMHO.

 

 

5. This is true but also in a limited space does mean losing practically a 3rd of the available space to being off scene

6. In this case it was kind of shoehorned in tour how what was possible and to avoid creating 2 inglenooks while having a shunting puzzle to play with. It could be easily changed to make it more proto typical or fit a different type of puzzle in. If you have any suggestions I could go back to the drawing board.

7. Again this was more done as an example than a fully scale track plan and could be easily changed.

 

I do completely agree with your other points and certainly if this was my own layout I would do thing slightly differently.

[Titanius Anglesmith]

36 minutes ago, Aire Head said:

 

7. Again this was more done as an example than a fully scale track plan and could be easily changed.

 

I wonder if Phil is suggesting hiding the inglenook “in plain sight”? For example, the three sidings could be much longer, but their useful lengths limited by “fixed” wagons that are not to be moved (maybe unloading is in progress?). Many yards used the running line as the headshunt. If there was a level crossing across the running line, that could limit the length of headshunt. 

[Aire Head]

2 hours ago, Titanius Anglesmith said:

 

I wonder if Phil is suggesting hiding the inglenook “in plain sight”? For example, the three sidings could be much longer, but their useful lengths limited by “fixed” wagons that are not to be moved (maybe unloading is in progress?). Many yards used the running line as the headshunt. If there was a level crossing across the running line, that could limit the length of headshunt. 

I like the idea of disguising the length of the sidings however I think using the running lines as a head shunt is less than ideal as it goes against OPs desire to run trains as the same time as shunting.

 

Also do apologise if I came off as a bit of an @£$€ in my previous post it was entirely unintentional!

[Titanius Anglesmith]

Ah yes, very good point about the headshunt / running line. 

[Crewlisle]

On 17/09/2019 at 17:07, Zomboid said:

You might get a "system" layout into that space if you go for a light railway or an industrial type complex, but main line locomotives pulling reasonable length trains from one place to another is going to be a squeeze.

 

May I suggest  you go to Google & enter 'Crewlisle' where you can see how much of an 00 gauge main line layout you can get in this space using three interconnected levels by 'thinking outside the box & run six coach expresses'.  Yes, it is not prototypical but it entertains & represents the WCML & suitable stock from Stanier locos in the mid 50s & finishing with the APT.  It has been to the NEC five times & will be there next year for its final show as the baseboards appear to be getting much heavier at each exhibition! 

 

Using my design, the high level terminus & goods yard could be longer in the space you have available.  'Crewlisle' is a simple DCC layout with the only polarity switch on the live diamond operated by an operating arm from the relevant Peco simple solenoid motor.  All my 30 Peco Electrofrog points rely on electrical contact via the point blades using basic Peco solenoid motors.  The only point failures I have had over 30 years I can count on one hand & then only in sidings.  Because I advocate this approach to point control with no polarity switches, many modellers think I should be burnt at the stake as a heretic!

 

At exhibitions my three helpers run a minimum of two or as many as four trains simultaneously to entertain the paying visitors.  Do what I did many yea rs ago when starting my layout based on the WCML from my train spotting days, write down what you want.  In my case it was a 4 platform terminus for 6 coach expresses, steam shed & turntable, diesel shed & goods yard on the high level.  The mid level  continuous run is the WCML with a three platform station & OLE.  The low level was the reversing loop so trains could go out & come back to the terminus.  On the reversing loop on the inside of the operating well I use 1350mm long cassettes t as my fiddle yard.  The cassettes are replenished from the stock boxes as required.  I have 53 locos, 65 passenger/parcel coaches & 120 wagons.

 

Before anyone rushes to condem my layout for a multitude of reasons like being unrealistic or too crowded, the late editor of Railway Modeller & author of many track plan books Cyril Freezer stopped at my layout at the Bristol Exhibition over 20 years ago & after discussing it with me for 20 minutes said, "You have a lot of railway in a small area but it does not look out of place".  That was praise indeed from the man himself!

 

So forget the digital track layout apps, think what you want on your layout, download the Peco point templates, place them where you want them then lay your track between them with a smooth flowing curve.  Adjust the position of your points if necessary.  Forget drawing track plans on a baseboard because in the ship building/repair business the saying goes, 'If a curve looks right, it is right'  & this applies to model railways as well.

 

Peter

 

 

 

[Zomboid]

5 hours ago, Crewlisle said:

May I suggest  you go to Google & enter 'Crewlisle' where you can see how much of an 00 gauge main line layout you can get in this space using three interconnected levels by 'thinking outside the box & run six coach expresses'.  

I'm aware of what Crewlisle is, and it's very impressive.

 

It is also what I would describe as "a squeeze".

 

I don't know the OP at all, but loads of interconnected levels is not something I would recommend to a newbie, unless their day job is as a joiner.

[jamespetts]

If you want unattended running, had you ever considered computer control instead of a loop? It might be easier to fit an interesting layout into the space without a loop.