GWR_Pannier Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 Hello Everyone, I am new to both RMWeb & to O Gauge and would like some constructive feedback on this track plan to see if indeed this will be my first O gauge Layout or whether I would be better of in OO still. I have designed a layout for OO which has been the case for some time now and things are in motion for boards arriving and so on, however a trip to the Milton Keynes Model Railway Show yesterday and seeing Cranmore operating there really opened my eyes to O. As my friend said you have more space than this why not do O? I am not entirely sure if I have or not as things look different in a house to in a large hall but the seeds of an idea were sown. So last night I duly made this tack plan: (All Measurements in cm) The Removable Fiddle Yard goes off the to the left and will go over my desk, working in IT I am actively looking for reasons not to use my computer at home so this will help with that! Despite this for a quick running session I have tried to incorporate an Inglenook Shunting Puzzle that can be run without the fiddle yard attached, clearly using self restraint to only put a maximum of 3 wagons in the middle siding! Some Track measurements: Station Area: 131.6cm Headshunt: 43cm Coal Merchants Siding: 59cm Goods Siding: 80cm Goods Shed/Crane Platform Siding: 91.44cm Loco Siding: 40cm In my head maths 2 coaches should easily fit in the platform and the headshunt should accomodate a 48xx/58xx, 57xx/8750, 64xx/74xx or 61xx including allowing 8cm for buffers (just using the peco rail built as a guide) Going off wheel base would the 43xx or 2251 fit also? I appreciate that the first thing I will encounter is a lot less R-T-R locos available to me but as my username suggests I am more than happy with a Pannier of some description. My main question is does this look squashed in for the sake of doing O gauge, or is it an ok plan with a bt of tweaking needed here and there? Kind Regards Christopher Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piemanlarger Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 I'm not far ahead of you when it comes to my 1st 0 guage layout. I've built a few 00 exhibition and indeed home layouts and although I start with a track plan, I usually goes with what works when building. I found my plan for my station did not work when I actually tried running ( hand of me) the coach through. Trial and error has been my way so far. One thing I think is the case more so wit 0 gauge is less is more. My layout is 18 inches x 16 foot and I've had to try and keep points down to a minimum while still making it entertain to operate. And hopefully watch ! Good luck with it 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted February 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 16, 2020 Christopher, I think you have tried to cram for too much point work into such a small space. Have a look at Westerner's 'Blakeney' thread for some inspiration. There are a number of very small 7 mm layouts in this section of the forum which you might look at as well. You have enough space for a 7 mm scale railway, but not in the way you have initially planned it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted February 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) Christopher, i felt a bit mean after reading my message, so I went and took a picture of a Dapol Pannier and B set so you can see what sort of lengths you can expect from a typical train. It's sitting on an old 48" long baseboard which I now use as a work bench. The loco and two coaches are buffered up and measure 44" inches overall. Edited February 16, 2020 by Happy Hippo Selpingl! 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westerner Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 I can't see any overall measurements for the size of the scenic section or for the fiddle yard. I feel with a smaller layout less is more. The scenic section of my Blakeney layout is 228cm by 60 cm and I'm planning to run just a one coach train plus obviously a freight train probably of no more than 3 wagons and a brake van. The fiddle yard is 102 cms. and is a 2 road sector plate. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ossygobbin Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) better not look at mine then, i have 7 points and a "fiddle yard" on a 8ft x 2ft Edited February 16, 2020 by ossygobbin 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 My St Budoc was 9ft in total with 6ft Scenic and needed the Fiddle Yard, (a swivelling sector plate) for shunting. And Trebudoc, again 9ft inc Fiddle Yard, had just 3 points in the 6ft scenic section, but was great to operate. But it would only take 1 Coach and a Loco. And finally, courtesy of Andy York. Less is more as Richard and others have said. 5 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR_Pannier Posted February 16, 2020 Author Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) Thank you Piemanlarger, Richard, Alan and Andy, I have taken out the only point I felt that I could while retaining the Inglenook sans fiddle yard (important for me to have this option as i cannot always guarantee the desk being clear for the fiddle yard to be placed upon): All measurements shown are in Decimal Inches now with each sidings length next to it and the overall board size are now visible. Just to veryfy though the boards are 101.57" x 27.56" or 258cm x 70cm so just a little more than your own there Alan. Thank you Richard for measuring the Pannier plus B Set for me at 44" buffer to buffer the carriages alone will fit nicely into my station area of 51.81 with room either side I have gone through the entire Blakeney thread now and I am very glad to have done, it is a very nice layout and a credit to its maker, I see westener gets around the fiddle yard/completing the run around by using the sector plate, I feel at current that is something were i to do it I would like more experience in the hobby first. Those are lovely images of your layout there Andrew P! Thank you for sharing them I hope I am explaining myself well enough? I really do appreciate all the help being given, must say I didn't expect this much! Sorry if I have overstepped any boundaries by using first names. OK I have looked again and I could loose this point here too and just use the head shunt as a 3 siding for inglenooking? - (is that a real term? if not it is now! ) does this improve the look? Kind Regards Christopher Edited February 16, 2020 by GWR_Pannier 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 That looks much better in my view Christopher, and should still work well as an Inglenook. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 Pen Y Bont, although longer was another example of Less is more and this time using the Platform for 5 in the Inglenook Shunting. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WM183 Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) I like your new design a lot! It's tempting to add more points and sidings, but usually a bad idea. Less is more in 7 they say. Edited February 16, 2020 by WM183 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR_Pannier Posted February 16, 2020 Author Share Posted February 16, 2020 Thank you Andy! I will admit to punching the air when I read your response in celebration I guess I don't need my OO GWR Pre-Orders now haha! (saying that I will still get a Bachmann 94xx when they come out as it can be used on my micro OO layout) I do like Pen Y Bont too, really looking forward to having a go at the extra detail that O requires you to put in! Kind Regards Christopher 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted February 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) Christopher, What I suggest you do is download some point templates from the Peco website and lay them out on a table. Allow 80 mm as a minimum between running lines (platform and loop lines), and a min of 90 mm for sidings. (From the G0G manual). It will give you a far better perspective on what is and isn't feasible. Railways are only generally laid out in very tight 'inglenook' style track plans in model form. By all means allow a little bit of compression, but not so that clearance during shunting moves is the thickness of a coat of paint. Edited February 16, 2020 by Happy Hippo 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR_Pannier Posted February 16, 2020 Author Share Posted February 16, 2020 I will do so Richard once my boards are in place so I can see it totally in situ first & before buying track Thank you again all for your help today I shall update this thread once I am underway with the boards! Kind Regards Christopher 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted February 16, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 16, 2020 Something I've wondered where a train is only passing through a couple of times its own length, how do you get it up to speed straight out of the fiddle yard? My 08 which is DCC fitted takes a good 6 feet just to increase from dead slow. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR_Pannier Posted February 16, 2020 Author Share Posted February 16, 2020 I have always seen it in a situation such as my track plan here that it is slowing down already but then with DCC it all boils down to how you set them up my Barclay reacts in a more real fashion to my eyes with 0 momentum and only 28 speed steps where my 1F is using 128 and 3 momentum (whatever the latter translates to in NCE Power cab speak it is a range 0-9) 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted February 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said: Allow 80 mm as a minimum between running lines (platform and loop lines), and a min of 90 mm for sidings. (From the G0G manual). It will give you a far better perspective on what is and isn't feasible. Between tracks or centre-to-centre? It's 45mm in 00. Which would suggest 80mm (78.75mm) as centre-to-centre minimum, not between tracks. Edited February 16, 2020 by Joseph_Pestell 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted February 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 16, 2020 10 minutes ago, Hal Nail said: Something I've wondered where a train is only passing through a couple of times its own length, how do you get it up to speed straight out of the fiddle yard? My 08 which is DCC fitted takes a good 6 feet just to increase from dead slow. you can adjust the acceleration/deceleration CV to give you 'instant' speed. don't ask me which ones though! 2 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said: Between tracks or centre-to-centre? It's 45mm in 00. Which would suggest 78mm as centre-to-centre minimum, not between tracks. Centre to Centre See here: https://www.gaugeoguild.com/manual/02_1_Plain track.pdf 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westerner Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 Allow a little more room for the Peco point templates. I found when printed off the came out a little smaller than the actual point. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
doilum Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 When mental mapping a layout, a standard Peco point is around 16" long. So, three make 48". When a point forms the end of a loop or siding, it's effective length becomes around 18.5" to allow clearance for locos and coaches. Less is more, but if a shunting puzzle pleases, why not. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ossygobbin Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 a couple of pics for comparison of less is more. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kes Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 Hi, just a thought that might get you a few more inches of space-peco points are nominally 6' radius. Marcway do points with a 4'6" radius which are a bit shorter. Dapol panniers will handle these fine. You can gain about 4" over the length of a crossover. I make my own points from copper clad strip and bullhead rail, but there are a few suppliers of sleepers, chairs and rail on the internet. I found moving the actual stock about on the board before laying any track confirmed the clearances. I have two o gauge layouts on the forum, Pawson's Pickles, which is 78" long, and my GWR terminus which is 15'6" including a 3'6" traverser. Good luck with your layout, it looks like it is going to be fun. Kevin. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted February 17, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 17, 2020 This is pretty compact: 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR_Pannier Posted February 18, 2020 Author Share Posted February 18, 2020 I thank you all for your help with this however locomotive prices have finally put me off O (the jump from a 57xx to a 45xx is a tad extreme to me) New thread should anyone be interested: Kind Regards Christopher Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now