New Layout

[70E]

I am taking my first tentative steps into O gauge after a lifetime in OO, like many others I have followed on this site Dapol and their 08 are to blame!

 

I am fortunate in that I have a shed 13 ft x 9ft which currently houses 22 years worth of OO layout which I will start dismantling later this year  although I still need to deal with the ‘emotional bit’! 

 

I wont be moving away from OO altogether as I have two small shunting layouts that I will retain that will be accommodated on one side of the shed.

 

That leaves one side and may be the end return of 9 ft.

 

I thought I would go away from the usual station scenario and having seem Mudmagnets Acacia Avenue I thought I would building something along similar lines with a BRS parcels depot. This means I don’t need particularly large locos or need rakes of coaches etc. However, saying that if I could squeeze the hint of a small terminus for an extra dimension that would be good.

 

So pending getting the shed ready I have been purchasing some stock.

 

So I have purchased the following.

 

Heljan Class 128 DPU

Heljan Class 33 (recent batch)

Dapol 08 Late BR green

Dapol 57xx BR Black

Dapol 57xx London Transport (I like the livery)

2 x Heljan BG’s

Various Dapol wagons

Dapol Autocoach BR Maroon (awaiting a BR black 14xx)

Dapol Class 121 on backorder

 

So the stock I have in the main has a WR theme and so the theme of the layout would have a West London bias as I could just get away with running the 14xx and autocoach like they did on the Greenford Branch as well as the LT 57xx in that it would need to come to the parcel depot for a specialist collection!

 

So looking at Acacia Ave track plan I wondered if it would provide sufficient interest and how it could be adapted with the 14xx/class 121 scenario so started to look around. Unlike OO there do not seem to be a lot of track plans in O gauge on the web although this forum and Youtube are good places to start. I am planning to join the O gauge guild .

 

I came across Ian Futers Victoria Park which looks like it could fit the bill nicely. See below ( no good a graphics so unable to show any changes)

 

 

It could be potentially be a scenic section of 8-9 ft  with the remainder being a traverser with a potential width of 2’6”? 

 

However, whilst common sense tells me less is more I can tend to err on the side of squeeze a bit more in so should I stick with the track plan as it is or maybe put a three way turnout in place of the first one on the R/H side to get another line if for parcel vans etc by moving the platform further back giving 3 intermediate roads and a fourth one for the passenger shuttle?

 

Are there alternative track plans out there that would fit the bill?

 

Getting used to size and scale will be the challenge for me so I was just looking for ideas, tips, words of wisdom etc from your good selves who have more experience in this gauge?

[Chris Turnbull]

Have you had a look at the Small Layouts booklets from the Gauge 0 Guild?  This is volume one which is about 30 years old but volume 2 can still be bought and volume 3 is in the course of preparation.  See the Guild website for more information.

 

https://www.gaugeoguild.com/Secured/gazette_archive/other publications/Small-layouts-1/offline/download.pdf

 

Chris Turnbull

[Happy Hippo]

70E (A first name is always helpful)

 

I've spent years dabbling in various scales and gauges, but it was only after I returned to  0 Gauge*, that I really managed to get stuck in and really enjoy railway modelling once more.

 

There are plenty of modellers in the same situation as you, and yes, the scale and sheer presence of the models sometimes gets some getting used to.

 

Keep on planning, plotting and even making things! When you're not sure, don't be afraid to ask:  There is no such thing as a stupid question.

 

Edit*  My first O gauge was Hornby tinplate, way back in 1958!

Edited March 7, 2020 by Happy Hippo

[brossard]

Snap!  I spent upwards of 30 years in 00 and finally changed to 0 when Dapol came along.  However, I decided to totally divest my 00 since I knew I wouldn't have the time or energy to do both scales.  That said, the club I belong to is 00 so I do still dabble a bit, although, having no stock I am mostly a spectator.

 

You've been busy with stock I see.  Dapol's wagons are very good I find.  I also like kits and these are addictive.  I have built way more than I will ever have room for I think.

 

A small layout is the way to go as a start I think.  Mine is a simple BLT but is still 21' long, incl 5' sector plate.

 

Best modelling decision I ever made.

 

Good luck.

 

John

[37114]

Good luck with your new layout,  I think Ian Futers plan is a good one and my own micro O gauge layout uses a similar plan and I love it. The one thing I would say about Ian's plan was the 2 car platform was unrealistically narrow so would be tempted to not include it

[sf315]

Hi was drawn into it the same as you with the Dapol 08.

Enjoying my O gauge experience and have a shunting plank layout Hillport Goods.

Already have the next idea in my head for another O gauge layout.

Keep at it an idea will pop into your head soon.

 

thanks Steve

[Hal Nail]

Depends what sort of movements you are planning but 9' isnt a lot on this scale and a fair bit of compromise is needed. I would personally want a run round though so I'd have a cross over on the left but create the space for that by "shifting" the most right hand point as if just under or even beyond the bridge. I'd probably not bother with the set back/headshunt and have the two lines converging as if there was a point out of sight. A traverser or cassettes could cope with the angle that would create running into the fiddle yard area.

[MarcD]

This is my micro layout. the track plan is basically the micro freight terminal layout in small layouts vol.1.

WC Boggs will be attending Telford this year as part of the Micro Layout competition.

 

All the track work is Peco set track buildings are Skytrex and the stock is mainly made from my own kits.

 

Its not finished

 

   Marc

[Nearholmer]

An absolutely huge amount depends upon the turnout radius that you are willing to use, because turnouts and clearing points eat length in 0 scale.

 

Because I work in in coarse-0, I'm very happy to use the sort of radius that Peco use for their 0 gauge Set-track (c40"), even with big locos, and that has allowed me to build a very viable small terminus in 8ft x 16

 

Points here are 40” [correction, 38.6”]  radius, but only 18 degrees turnout, rather than 22.5 degrees with the Peco Set-track, which makes a huge difference. Many people cut the Peco ones down to 18 degrees or even slightly less.

 

 

You might consider arranging things so that small locos like an 08, 03, 05, 57xx  etc can run-round a train, by using small radius points for loco release (they will all happily traverse the Peco Set-track), but use larger radius in the "throat" so that long beasties like a 128 aren't being asked to do a shimmy.

 

This is a very rough copy of my layout translated to Peco fine-scale track.

 

 

The ‘moving on from a train set’ 00 layout that was a project build in Railway Modeller over autumn 2019, finishing possibly in January 2020 could easily work like that, with one or two 6ft radius points, and the rest 40", and would very easily condense to 0. It’s only subtly different from what I built.

 

 

 

Edited March 9, 2020 by Nearholmer

[Chris Turnbull]

A comment that I have heard from micro-layout owners is that, whilst they can be quick and fun to build, the novelty swiftly wears off and they become boring to operate.  The upside is that it is easy to build another!  It all depends on what you want from your hobby.

 

Chris Turnbull

[Nearholmer]

Yes, my small layout drives me faintly mad by about mid-afternoon at an exhibition, because operation becomes repetitious.

 

Thankfully, at home it becomes part of a bigger layout!

[brossard]

I tend to agree with Nearholmer about turnout radius.  I have made several small radius turnouts by blowing up the Peco 00 template by 199% (to account for the gauge difference).  This produces a turnout that is a couple of inches shorter than the standard 0 Peco turnout and smaller radius .  This reduces the fouling distance enabling you to get more in to your limited space.

 

Building your own turnouts is a much cheaper way to acquire them. 

 

John

[thirty2a]

another good thing about O Gauge micro layouts is you don't need loads of stock. that said I have  way to much ! blame cheap finds at Ally Pally .. must not buy more, must not buy more.

Edited March 9, 2020 by thirty2a

[70E]

Thank you to all of you who have responded to my questions. Certainly some food for thought and I definitely need to plot it out on a roll of lining paper first.

 

Thank you to for the links and photos which are of great benefit. I guess its fair to say like the modelling side most with the running of trains a close second so may be this first step will be the practice with something better to follow , who knows!

 

I'll let you know in due course how I get on

 

regards

 

Mark

[DCB]

I like making models and running trains in roughly equal proportions.  That's why I set a couple of trans running and start building things as they trundle round.   So I am wondering if there Is  room for a continuous loop of O in the shed. I knew a bloke in Suffolk who had a loop of O gauge round the inside of his shed outside his 00 layout, Give the locos a chance to stretch their legs?  

I think Futers Victoria Park would soon get boring to operate esp if you already have a coupe of other shunting planks.

[brossard]

G0G recommends a min radius of 4'.  If you think about it, that's about 2' in 00 and really tight.  This will accommodate a 6 coupled loco.  However, a loco with pony truck or bogie will probably cause buffer lock when propelling because of the overhang.

 

A more comfortable radius is 6'.  To get a reasonable size roundy roundy will require a lot of space.

 

Most 0 gauge layouts I see here are of the BLT type.

 

John

[thirty2a]

you can do it with peco set track O Gauge, not sure of the radius though

[Nearholmer]

Peco 0 gauge set-track is c40" radius, which is fine for locos up to medium-sized 0-6-0 diesel shunters or tank engines without the need to resort to drop-link couplings or very wide buffers.

 

As Brossard says, the really difficult tank engines on tight radius are those with bogies, because the end-throw can become large. I run 0-4-4T and 2-6-4T on 38" radius in coarse-scale, and their 'tail-swing' is huge. They only work because I use drop-link couplers, which keep buffer-heads apart, and because the locos have plenty of clearance to allow the bogies to move side-ways a lot..

 

Smaller, old-style, Bo-Bo diesel locos generally have fairly short overhang from the bogie-pivot to the buffer-face, so don't create massive end throw, but may have other limitations such as limited bogie rotation due either to the way the mechanism works or detail parts fouling things. It would be worth the OP trying his Class 33 on tight curves ...... it might work, it might not!

 

Coaches and EMU/DMU cars are similar to the above, but are often looong . On c40" curves, vehicles over about 50ft scale length start to create centre-throw challenges, because the centre of the vehicle over-sails the sleeper-ends, even if their bogies can rotate sufficiently. The 121 and 128 that the OP lists are the ones that would worry me.

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2020 by Nearholmer

[MarcD]

Boggs is all set track. I have had to modify the dingham couplings that are fitted to the stock. But it works well but the locos are all 0-4-0 and short 0-6-0Ts with 15ft long wagons.

Marc

[railwayrod]

Just a thought 70E. I like what you are trying to achieve and wish you well in this new venture. I note that your shed is 13ft long x 9 feet wide which although small for 0 gauge is adequate for a layout in this scale. Have you considered cutting a hole in the end of the shed and having a return loop in the garden? This would enable you to use the whole length of the shed for your "scenic" section and give your locos a chance to stretch their legs.  Another thought if you have outdoor space would be to build a layout in the form of a continuous run by cutting holes in both ends of the shed  This idea may be a bit further ahead of where you are now but might give you food for thought in the future. I am lucky in that my own shed of 30ft long and my 0 gauge layout Ramchester is featured both in the current Railway Modeller and on RMweb but even so I wish I had a few more feet to play with. It seems to me that we modellers always want that little bit more or am I the only one who thinks this?

 

Good luck with your new project and happy modelling.

 

Rod

[Happy Hippo]

1 hour ago, railwayrod said:

 It seems to me that we modellers always want that little bit more or am I the only one who thinks this?

 

No Rod, you definitely are not!

 

Without wishing to hijack the thread, I have two through lines (fiddle yard/scenic section/fiddle yard) under construction. one is my 'main' layout, and the 'diversion' is for the G0G small layout competition.  They are both 18 feet long.  The main layout started life at 16' as it would fit into the garage, but operational necessity required an extension, so it would no longer fit.  Now I'm considering even more boards.  As it's a straight line I can erect it in our sitting room through into the conservatory!  Not ideal, so operating is at either exhibitions or after protracted negotiations!

 

Getting back on topic, I've built and operated live steam at both ground level and at a 'sensible' height in the garden.  I spent more time maintaining the low level line than I did running it. That which was above ground level, was more successful.

 

If you are building  a line that exits/enters a shed, then make sure that the hole that's cut into the shed wall is well sealed against the elements.  A plug type door will stop most of the wind and the rain, but rainwater has a horrid habit of getting into places you would not believe possible, leading to damp and rot where you least expect it.

 

John's (brossard) point about 6 ft radius curves is worth remembering.  Anything less is in the realms of an industrial line, light railway or narrow gauge. I've put my Dapol B set onto a 4'6" radius curve, and when being pulled through the curve, the inner most buffer sets are fully compressed.

 

 

 

 

[70E]

so would it work better if I made the layout L shaped and I used the 9'0" return for the traverser? If so what radius curve would I need bearing I forgot to mention in my first post I have a Heljan 61xx as well!

 

Mark

[Hal Nail]

1 hour ago, 70E said:

so would it work better if I made the layout L shaped and I used the 9'0" return for the traverser? If so what radius curve would I need bearing I forgot to mention in my first post I have a Heljan 61xx as well!

 

Mark

You'll get slightly more in if you can go diagonally, with a removable traverser if that blocks the door but you won't be able to curve round two sides in that space realistically.

 

To give an illustration I set up 3 lengths of flexi - which is about what you are talking - to test locos and at realistic acceleration they are only just getting going when I have to brake. The one time I tried a burst of instant full speed, it shot off the end, across the floor and into a wall!

Edited March 15, 2020 by Hal Nail

[brossard]

My layout is 21' long but my basement is only 20'.  I have put it diagonally across the room.  There is about 18" clearance at one end to allow me to (just) pass through.

 

John

[70E]

I came across the plan in the picture on Tower Models website and wondered if it might suit my situation and 'ambition' better but as a terminus rather than the impression of a through station. The compromise would be 9'0" width as opposed to 10'0".

 

Does it work in practice what do you think?

 

The shed has an off set door so would allow space for the sector plates.

 

I'm not sure about building my own points `I know they would be cheaper but are Marcway points smaller than PECO?