Beginner needs to get started on design

[jimmythedog]

Hi all, first time post

I have a bedroom that I intend to use, but I am at a complete loss when it comes to designing the layout

I've spent endless hours reading books, magazines & surfing t'internet, but all to no avail - so I'm hoping that someone can give me the kickstart I so need

 

My gauge preference is OO, as N is too small for my ageing eyes & hands! (this is a retirement project, after all)

It will also be DCC and, eventually, I would love to have some form of automation - but I'm getting ahead of myself here

Anyway, here is the room along with the two door locations, and my initial thought on where the useful layout area is:

 

I originally though I'd have an 8'x4' board, but quickly realised that I couldn't get around the board, so I would need to cut out an access hatch

That would have given me an endless loop (which does kinda satisfy the people that simply want to watch a train go around), but leave little room for much else e.g. shunting etc.?

So, that's how I ended up with the almost U-shaped area above, though I'm not ruling out the 8x4 board yet (I could even utilize the top right corner for a fiddle/goods yard?)

I also wondered if there was any point in converting the U-shaped to an M-shape by utilizing some of the open space, or if it's even possible to get curves to go into that area?

One thing I should mention is that the door at the top right of the room, is generally unused and, at a push, I suppose I could block it up

 

Initially, I simply want to get the track down, get it wired, so I can "get my hands wet" and understand the implications of various choices, before I start the actual modelling, but I don't want to get it completely wrong, and become disillusioned

 

So, in conclusion, I have a bare canvas (perhaps that is why I feel it so daunting), and would love any form of help, just to get me going

What would you choose - 8x4 or U-shape? (or something else?)
For the latter, would an terminus at both ends work?

 

Sorry for being so vague, but I'm just lost for ideas at the moment

[rockershovel]

Just as a thought, had you considered a lifting bridge or section on casters to allow a continuous run through a fiddle yard? That would allow the doors to remain in use, allow you to develop a through station and maximise use of the space. You would also have scope for continuous running for running in, or just allowing one train to run unattended while you operated another (since you mention DCC and automation). 

 

I’d reckon that the room was too small for a centre island  - try marking it out on the floor with tape or pieces of cardboard, you’ll soon see what is realistic. Don’t forget you will need room for a control panel, storage shelves, possibly a workspace. 

 

[rockershovel]

Another suggestion, given the size of the room, is that you get a builders merchants catalogue and buy two or three cheap hollow-core doors and some trestles. You’ll need to be a bit creative about one of them, given the space. That will give you something to work with while you try out track plans. 

 

I’ve done this for my O gauge experiment and it’s a useful way to get going quickly, I’ve lesrnt s lot from it. 

Edited December 13, 2019 by rockershovel

[jimmythedog]

Hi @rockershovel, thanks for the tips - I'd read about "removable" sections, but never looked any further into it, but now I will

I was kind of imagining having something running continuously around a loop, while one or two others were also performing some tasks - that stuff piques my interest and got me to thinking about the automated stuff, but again, getting ahead of myself - need to get this design started first

Thanks again

[mdvle]

Good start with providing the dimensions.

 

But, more about what interests you.

 

What era do you want to model (or already have models for)?

 

Interested in goods, or passenger, or both?

 

More into passenger operations, or goods shunting?

 

city/urban/countryside?

 

etc.

 

In other words, what are your interests that you would like to attempt to recreate.

[Philou]

Welcome to RMweb - I'm sure the collective will be along soon with plenty of ideas. For my part, if you are not averse to the removable section idea, it means you could be looking at a roundy-roundy type with either storage or a terminus type station along the northern edge. It will to some degree depend what you want out of your layout: Steam/transition/early modern/recent modern; Looking at trains going round and round; Shunting manoeuvres;  Branch or mainline; Urban or rural?

 

Welcome also to the world of DCC, I'm sure you won't regret it especially if you want some form of automation.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

Edited December 13, 2019 by Philou
Bum - mdvle beat me to it!

[jimmythedog]

Hi Mdvle & Philou, and thanks for your replies

 

I've not really put much thought into removable sections yet - when I first heard about them, they seemed like a bit of work, and felt like a weak point - perhaps I should look into it more
However, given the option, I think I'd rather not have them, if at all possible - but if it becomes too restrictive, then I will obviously revisit that decision

 

I think I'm edging towards the steam/diesel transition era (as that was the time when I was a kid), but I was wondering whether I'd have enough room for diesel locos?

If possible, I think I'd like to have both passenger and goods, though I realise I'm probably restricted to one or two passenger coaches (DMU's?)

As for urban/rural - no real bias towards one or the other, though possibly a slight nod to rural

 

When it comes to those sort of questions, I'm pretty open for this initial project, but I have a feeling that as time goes by, I may then fall into particular camps, but for now, I just want to get started with something that will technically challenge me a bit, so not *too* simple

 

By know I guess you've picked up how much of a novice I am - completely new, so please don't take anything for granted, and throw as much stuff as you can at me - it all helps

[Philou]

Mmmmm ......... It would seem that an end-to-end layout will be the order of the day and you could well end up with a BLT (branch line terminus) - or at least somewhere that gives your trains a reason for going there. There have been some very good small layouts that have been based on a scrap yard with a little steel mill or small chemical works. A dairy springs to mind and so does a quarry. Or what about a small dockside with a passenger platform? There was another layout topic:

It's only a page or so long, but it does have a plan of Ramsgate harbour station which could be a springboard into something else.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[mdvle]

9 hours ago, jimmythedog said:

I think I'm edging towards the steam/diesel transition era (as that was the time when I was a kid), but I was wondering whether I'd have enough room for diesel locos?

If possible, I think I'd like to have both passenger and goods, though I realise I'm probably restricted to one or two passenger coaches (DMU's?)

As for urban/rural - no real bias towards one or the other, though possibly a slight nod to rural

 

When it comes to those sort of questions, I'm pretty open for this initial project, but I have a feeling that as time goes by, I may then fall into particular camps, but for now, I just want to get started with something that will technically challenge me a bit, so not *too* simple

 

On the assumption that you don't own any stock yet, and given how open you are, have you considered either narrow gauge (OO9) or an industrial type layout?

 

They aren't for everyone, but do allow you to get more in / have sharper curves.

 

 

[DCB]

Not sure about those dimensions, it looks like  long sides of 11 X 9 ft and short side of 6ft  (or 132" X 108"+ 72") but the figures of 105" and 107"  and short side of 68" is mentioned.

That is plenty of room for a BLT or medium size urban terminus along the 9ft end but not a lot of room at the 6ft end for anything.

See doodle, 

Maybe forget the 6ft bit and have the terminus along the long side and the FY or traverser along the 9ft?

I like to shunt, especially carriage shunting removing stock from incoming trains to the carriage sidings and then bringing it back for departures, but when I'm working on locos or stock or fiddling I like to run trains continuously.  Having a continuous run and also a terminus is my optimum, but if I had to choose you can terminate trains on a continuous run but not run trains continuously on a terminus to FY layout.

[Harlequin]

Hi Jimmy,

 

You've got a reasonable space and you can fit a continuous run layout (aka a "roundy round" layout) in there with a bit of thought. It would need one hinged/lifting section (because you said one door is rarely used) but it would be worth the effort.

• As David said: you can terminate trains on a continuous run but not run trains continuously on a terminus to FY layout.
• A continuous run is the simplest form of automation - just set something running and sit back (assuming you've set the points correctly and there are no obstructions!)
• The layout surrounds you in a very satisfying way - the layout is not just in the room the room is the layout.
• You can safely let younger visitors play.

The rarely used door has the advantage of opening outwards so you could build baseboards in front of it. The door would still be usable by crawling under the baseboards when needed (hopefully not often).

 

 

Edited December 14, 2019 by Harlequin

[jimmythedog]

Thanks everyone for your input.

Thinking about it, the roundy roundy option does seem attractive, to have something running around while other stuff is going on

And with that side door hardly being used, I could justify crawling under it on the very rare occasions I need to

Based on the above, I took my first stab at trying to get some something down "on paper"

 

So, I came across a design in Peco's "A compendium of track plans...", and I made an attempt to translate it an into AnyRail design

It kinda fits in the bedroom, and also gives me a bit of space left over on the right (the orange square is the entrance door area, so I cannot use that, but I am willing to build in front of the door on the side)

• Do you think it would be worth pursuing this design?
• I was wondering if that space on the right could be a fiddle yard?
• Is there any shunting that could be performed? (again, I'm showing me ignorance here)

I really am appreciating the help you're all offering (even though some of the terms are still unknown to me, and I have to scurry off to look them up)

 

 

[rockershovel]

Extend the curve out into the space by the unused door. 

[Harlequin]

[Robert Stokes]

I think that the diagram in the previous post shows a lifting flap across the doorway (and you would need some way to get inside your design). If it is very carefully made this will work, but there is an alternative which avoids the difficulties associated with it. This is to build the layout high enough (say about 5' to its lowest point) so that it is easy to duck under on your way in and out. The connection across the doorway could then be permanent (or at least semi-permanent with some way of opening a gap if necessary). Of course how high it needs to be depends on your height. I'm only 5' 7" so I find it easy to duck under 5'. I would certainly want to have the longest continuous run possible.

 

Robert

[rockershovel]

Club test track is about 4’6” above floor level, with a duck-under. It’s been that way for years and doesn’t cause any serious issues. 

[imt]

But DO REMEMBER that height can increase reach problems.  Deep boards against a wall will need duck under access to the back as well!

[Chimer]

On 14/12/2019 at 02:12, DavidCBroad said:

Not sure about those dimensions, it looks like  long sides of 11 X 9 ft and short side of 6ft  (or 132" X 108"+ 72") but the figures of 105" and 107"  and short side of 68" is mentioned.

 

 

My initial thought and query was the same as David's - is the longer side actually around 11 feet (11 squares as drawn) or 9 (107 inches as stated)?   It makes one hell of a difference …..

[JDW]

On 14/12/2019 at 13:29, jimmythedog said:

Thanks everyone for your input.

Thinking about it, the roundy roundy option does seem attractive, to have something running around while other stuff is going on

And with that side door hardly being used, I could justify crawling under it on the very rare occasions I need to

Based on the above, I took my first stab at trying to get some something down "on paper"

 

So, I came across a design in Peco's "A compendium of track plans...", and I made an attempt to translate it an into AnyRail design

It kinda fits in the bedroom, and also gives me a bit of space left over on the right (the orange square is the entrance door area, so I cannot use that, but I am willing to build in front of the door on the side)

• Do you think it would be worth pursuing this design?
• I was wondering if that space on the right could be a fiddle yard?
• Is there any shunting that could be performed? (again, I'm showing me ignorance here)

I really am appreciating the help you're all offering (even though some of the terms are still unknown to me, and I have to scurry off to look them up)

 

 

 

Of course, it depends where exactly your interests lay, but the important thing to bear in mind with plans like this is that it is very much a train set plan, rather than a realistic or prototypical plan. Think about how trains would run on it. You couldn't, for example, do anything in the terminus station without blocking the "main" (roundy-roundy) line. The bay platform on the right is pretty much the same, you can't really use it without blocking access to the sidings, which in turn you can't really do anything with as an arriving train would have no way to release the loco to allow it to run around and shunt without using the main line then reversing half way around the layout. There's no real opportunities to do any realistic shunting, or for any kind of realistic operation. Try and think through the process that would happen in real life, and how it would be worked and resourced, and that will help you decide what works best. It helps too if there's a reason for things - why two coal offices for example - and what purpose does the one on the left serve? Why two loco sheds, the one top right has no real use, any train arriving and leaving those sidings will already have a loco.

[rockershovel]

Given the general size and shape, and assuming OO or HO is used, I’d suggest a through station with a continuous main line, some goods facilities and a terminal platform for local services. There could be a run-through fiddle yard/handling area, and a duck-under across the main entry. The goods yard can be separated from the passenger platforms, as is almost invariably the prototype practice; some limited loco facilities like a water crane and provision for a station pilot ... and that ought to fill the available space nicely. 

 

 

 

 

[jimmythedog]

17 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

My initial thought and query was the same as David's - is the longer side actually around 11 feet (11 squares as drawn) or 9 (107 inches as stated)?   It makes one hell of a difference …..

Sorry, don't know what happened there!
The room is actually a touch short of 9 foot square (as shown in the later AnyRail diagram)

[Chimer]

7 minutes ago, jimmythedog said:

Sorry, don't know what happened there!
The room is actually a touch short of 9 foot square (as shown in the later AnyRail diagram)

 

Yes, I spotted the second diagram after I posted …. 

[TonyMay]

You could also try rehanging the other door so it opens the other way, or replace it with a sliding door.  It seems to me that sometimes people make all this effort to allow space for a door opening but for equal effort could just have changed the door instead.

[Sturminster_Newton]

To turn the debate on it's head.

 

This all assumes OO as the motivation, and there is a lot to argue in its favour.

 

But N-gauge would open up a LOT more options and fewer compromises plus N can be convinced to run around a 9" curve, perhaps an added fillet of baseboard to allow a more generous width for turning the track giving an out and back layout and higher mainline speeds. With a reversing loop main line encircling a fiddle yard for local railway and freight operations in a non-scenic fiddle yard area.

 

The basic layout could also run as an end to end more convincingly as a heritage railway which would allow the mix of contemporary and historic, steam and diesel and play to those who amass collections of locomotives across a wide range of regions.

 

My other thought would be to combine 9 and 16.5 mm scale and develop a scenic railway a line where 6 and 9 radius curves are a norm and line speeds are low.

 

O-16.5 also has potential and it has a wide range of support my thought would be recreating a chunk of the Amberley Chalk-pits line.

 

The modelling world is a broad church and fringe scale gauge combinations have their followers:

 

G-scale (1:22.5) with 009 or 0-16.5 or 30mm track should not be closed out.

 

Go up to 1:12 scale and a huge range of options open up with every commercial gauge offering a potential for those who like the idea of modelling something different in the guise of a T gauge line representing a garden railway encircling a dolls house.

 

In the end it is up to the modeller, to my mind it is better to give a little time to view the potentials of other scale and gauge combinations within the space available rather than to wade in with "In OO you could do...".

[The Johnster]

What do you want the layout to do for you?  What sort of period do you want to model, or are you not too bothered about correct period?  What sort of operation do you like; complex shunting problems, trains tailchasing around a continuous run, maybe a mixture (train orbiting the continuous run while you shunt the goods shed), or something else?  What sort of modelling floats your boat; happy with RTR, or want to improve it, which will lead to kit and scratch building; it always does.  Maybe you are more interested in scenery or buildings for the trains to run through. 
 

If your penchant is for building locos and stock, kits or scratch, arguably you don’t need a layout and the space will serve your needs better as a workshop with a test track.  Maybe you want to build the dream layout on the train set box lid from when you were an anklebiter. 
 

Whatever you do, you will be IMHO well advised to ask yourself these questions, and answer them, before you start to build the layout, and then stick to the plan.  You will this way avoid expensive, time wasting, and disheartening false starts, and you will find that a clear intention of this sort will prescribe the track plan and what you include in it.  Take some time and care over this as it is at least as important as any other aspect of the layout.  Visit exhibitions (when the plague is over), check layouts out on YouTube, and take magazines; you will have no shortage of inspiration and, let’s be honest, some of the YouTube layouts will give you an idea what to avoid, names withheld to protect the guilty.  
 

When you have done this rather more cerebral preparation, we will be much better able to visualise what we think you want, and offer advice and suggestions, as well as pointing you in the direction of similar layouts or suitable publications. 
 

Good luck, let us know how you’re progressing, and stay safe!