Large Corner Layout

[Dan.N]

Hello,
has anyone already built this Hornby Large Corner Layout ? It's really big (8' x 8'). Thanks for all your replies.

Large Corner Layout

 

[Campaman]

Thats got an awful lot of track in what a lot of people on here will say is a small space. ( I only have an 8 x 8 space  which internally comes out at 7' 10"), doesn't look like much space for scenery, if that's what you want, and you could probably build similar for a lot less money.

[DCB]

I don't really understand why anyone would build this layout.    There is no way back  from the left hand lower station without running wrong road,  I would flip the layout so at least the connection to the loco depot was trailing.   Actually at that price you could make a much better layout following one of CJ Freezer's layouts or one of Harlequins than making this.  For one thing it uses set track points.  They are sharp radius, derailment prone, ugly and when you move on to more advanced layouts you will have to replace them with something less sharp, such as Peco Streamline.  If you start with streamline you can re use it.   Could be interesting on DCC with two pairs of trains doing the follow my leader thing  but its a bit of a monster. seems aimed at running Gordon the Big Engine with two coaches and reaching the back will be a stretch.

 

 

 

 

stststation 

[Nearholmer]

The original is a really strange design indeed. I almost wonder if it might be a US Lionel tinplate 0 gauge design uplifted by Hornby, but it doesn’t work for right-hand running either!

 

Nothing wrong with a ‘train set’ type layout, but they could have designed one that worked properly.

 

DCB has it nailed.

[Dan.N]

Many thanks for all your replies. I also drew my own track plan:

 

[Dungrange]

I guess the question is what do you want from the layout?  The first plan that you posted looks very much like it was an attempt to squeeze as much track as possible into the available space.  Perhaps it's Hornby's desire to sell as much track as possible.  That's not for me, but it is what some people want and that's okay.

 

With regards your second plan, I'll make three comments:

1. Both circuits have sections with R605 double first radius curves.  These are okay if you plan to limit yourself to shorter wheelbase or older stock, but many newer models are designed for a minimum of second radius (ie R607).  As such, the layout as drawn may prohibit you from running some new stock that you may like.  If possible consider the use of R607 and R609 instead of R605 and R607.
2. Gradients are something that personally I would avoid.  You are going to need something like 3" or 75 mm clearance between your upper and lower track levels and you have something like 12 feet of track in which to make that climb and descent.  That therefore gives you an average gradient of around 1:36, which is very much at the steep end of what people find acceptable.  Possible problems will be exacerbated by the tight curves in the middle of your gradient, which is usually where it will be steepest.  Steep gradients mean that you need to run shorter trains.  The definition of short will be dependent on the locomotives that you plan to use.  Diesel locomotives tend to have better haulage than steam locomotives, but you're probably still going to limit yourself to maybe three or four coach trains at most and some locomotives may struggle with more than two coaches.  It would be worthwhile conducting some gradient tests with your stock before committing to the plan.
3. There doesn't appear to be any 'operational interest'.  All you can do is drive two trains round and round, up and down your gradient.  That might be all that you want, but I feel that there needs to be a purpose, otherwise the operation becomes boring. I would therefore be looking for some sidings that you can shunt, so you have at least half a dozen wagons that you need to marshal into your next goods train. Will there be a station?  Does it need a loop to hold a train or a bay platform to allow a Diesel Multiple Unit or similar to turn back.

When designing a layout, try to work through the way you would envisage operating it.  Where does the train start from; in which direction are you going to drive it and how do you get back to where you started?  Use your finger to trace your route.  At the moment, you have shown a point that will presumably lead to a station, goods yard or motive power depot.  You can drive out forwards, but to get back there, you need to reverse the train in after it has made several circuits of your track.  Is that the type of operation that you want?

[Dan.N]

Thank you very much for your input Dungrange. Very interesting and very helpful. I must work harder on my project before buying something.

[DCB]

Dungrange said it all.   I built a layout with similar gradients which has never been finished because modern steam era Ready to Run could not haul decent train up the slope. Visually there is little you can do with it as it is all gradients and there is just about no play value, except for Thomas and Perky having a race.  Don't knock it, it's great fun. Actually it is a bit like some digital Scalextric layouts with the lane change crossovers.

There was a chap redesigning a similar size layout a few months ago on this forum which might give a few pointers.

[Nearholmer]

16 minutes ago, DavidCBroad said:

Actually it is a bit like some digital Scalextric layouts with the lane change crossovers.

That was exactly what it put me in mind of, and I fear that it would have to be operated accordingly.

 

Actually, you know, that might be quite fun, if highly un-railway-like!

 

Battlespace turbo-cars!

[Dungrange]

1 hour ago, DavidCBroad said:

Actually it is a bit like some digital Scalextric layouts with the lane change crossovers.

 

I can see the Scalextric similarity - I used to have a similar figure of eight style Scalextric set when I was a child.  It was fun trying to get the cars to stay on the track.

 

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

That was exactly what it put me in mind of, and I fear that it would have to be operated accordingly.  Actually, you know, that might be quite fun, if highly un-railway-like!

 

Battlespace turbo-cars!

 

Of course whether a layout can be operated like the real railway or not isn't important to many young children and a lot of published layout plans are possibly intended to cater for their needs as much as those of an adult.  Operating at exhibitions, you'll occasionally hear an excited (and usually hopeful) "they're going to crash" from a young child who possibly finds layouts that aim for prototypical operation at prototypical speeds a bit dull.  A head on collision with wagons derailing everywhere might be quite appealing to a young age group, but as an adult, I wouldn't relish the thought of a high speed impact between two new DCC Sound fitted locomotives hauling rakes of wagons costing £50 a piece.  I have a different perspective compared to a young boy.

 

Looking at the plan in the first post, I note that the stations have platforms that are around 18" in length.  That's effectively a locomotive and a single coach - that's all that can be accommodated in the 'station'.  Such short trains don't appeal to me, but to a child with pocket money constraints, they just have to pretend that their one coach train is actually a prestigious express.  Growing up, I've lost that ability to pretend.

 

3 hours ago, Dan.N said:

 I must work harder on my project before buying something.

 

I think you need to think about whether you are trying to create a model of the real railway or simply trying to create the sort of train set that you might have wanted as a boy.  I can see that as a young child, I would probably have coveted the layout plan in the original post.  Lots of track and the opportunity to run trains all over the place - who cares about prototypical operating practises.  However, I'm no longer that young boy, which is why the original plan no longer appeals to the adult me.

[DanN]

Thanks for all your replies folks. As always, another false start. Back to the office for finding a better idea.   

[Zomboid]

Don't be put off... Usually layout planning works best if you start by defining what your available space is, and then asking what do you want your layout to do?

[F-UnitMad]

On 06/03/2020 at 17:10, Dan.N said:

has anyone already built this Hornby Large Corner Layout ?

For what it's worth, in over 40 years in the hobby, I've never heard of or seen any layout that's been built from a Hornby track plan book.!!

[DanN]

[The Johnster]

On 08/03/2020 at 12:40, F-UnitMad said:

For what it's worth, in over 40 years in the hobby, I've never heard of or seen any layout that's been built from a Hornby track plan book.!!

In over 60, neither have I, and most of those in Cyril Freezer’s ‘60 Plans’ are more inspirational than being capable of successful execution.  Triang/Triang Hornby/Hornby track plans are attempts to get you to buy at least one of every item in the catalogue, unlike the track mats which are a fairly sensible way to extend a child’s train set.