Jump to content

Is a continuous run possible?


Recommended Posts

Daft question- if you "have" to be able to get to the window on the long wall, could you make the whole layout slide out from the wall to do so ?  

 

Because that might allow you to have a deeper layout if you are set on having a continuous run around the long leg, a fiddle yard on the "back" side, and reduction of the size of the layout.  Put runners down on the floor (something like 5/8" U track in Aluminum) with flooring filling in the spaces between them, then the whole lot run on sliders that you can pull it out off the wall to operate, or push it against the wall to "store" it.  

One thing to think of is that the square footage you are going to use costs at least 100 pounds/sq ft to buy...so making wise use of it is important.

 

James

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dagworth said:

Second radius is 438mm so a circle is 876mm or 34 1/2 inches.

 

Second radius is *just* possible to get round in 3ft

 

Andi

 

 

 

It would be tight, as the radius is worked on the centre of the rails.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Harlequin that sounds really interesting. I don't suppose you would have a back of a postage stamp sketch at all? i realise that's a lot to ask but I can't quite visualise the branch line in my head. Really appreciate the suggestion.

 

@peach james runners are something else I'd not thought of but I'll definitely look into it, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Dagworth said:

Second radius is 438mm so a circle is 876mm or 34 1/2 inches.

 

Second radius is *just* possible to get round in 3ft

 

Andi

 

 

1 hour ago, sandwich station said:

 

It would be tight, as the radius is worked on the centre of the rails.

He could always tell the missus that his 1 yard wide measurement has had to be "metricated" by order of the EU.;)

(Model railways construction and use regulations!)

Then there would be another 3.37" to play with.:yes:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Strangely, I was only having a discussion with someone on Facebook about the difficulties of getting a 2R continuous run on a 3' baseboard a couple of days ago. I suggested in the interests of safety, running a 2x1 batten along the front of the baseboard, top of the batten flush with the baseboard surface, to give an extra bit of width. I then suggested running a length of hardboard along and proud of the 2x1 to act as a wall to prevent derailed stock from falling off the front. I'd recommend all the same again here.

 

In terms of layout itself, I got this far before I hit the parts limit in the free version of SCARM:

 

image.png.c225afa9381ef136dd2ba004cba05cf3.png  

The plan is to have a terminus station along the front, feeding a set of storage loops and a reversing loop behind. A goods line/harbour branch runs along the front to provide a continuous run (and allows loaded/empty trains to run to/from the docks). 

 

The top two platforms can handle 4 coach trains, the bottom two 5-6 coaches.

 

The goods yard was intended to go behind the station platforms, angled towards the top right hand corner. The hidden sidings would be concealed by low-relief warehouses backing on to the sidings.

 

 I had originally intended for the loco yard to go down the other side of the 'L', however it appears there is room for one in the top right corner of the layout, leaving the other side of the 'L' to be used as industrial sidings, branch line terminus etc according to taste.

 

Alternatively, the track plan on the long side of the 'L' could be 'flipped' (reversing loop in the top right corner). The reversing loop could be hidden under a townscape, extending down the short side of the 'L', with working trams or road vehicles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, AndyMac7 said:

@Harlequin that sounds really interesting. I don't suppose you would have a back of a postage stamp sketch at all? i realise that's a lot to ask but I can't quite visualise the branch line in my head. Really appreciate the suggestion.

 

 

Something like this in broad outline:

638345978_AndyMacSeven2.png.8e91330560a2541dea03ca130bd00f0a.png

  • Like 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very clever thinking by Phil.

 

Depending on how you want to do the scenery / train length I would consider adding a loco length section at the end (bottom) of the fiddle yard so you could also move the loco off the bottom end of the train and get it moved back to the top end for it's next journey onto the layout (perhaps even have it as a turntable).

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, mdvle said:

Very clever thinking by Phil.

 

Depending on how you want to do the scenery / train length I would consider adding a loco length section at the end (bottom) of the fiddle yard so you could also move the loco off the bottom end of the train and get it moved back to the top end for it's next journey onto the layout (perhaps even have it as a turntable).

I imagined using loco-lifts on the traverser to do that job. That’s cheap, simple and flexible.

 

How the branch station scene is supported above the traverser is a bit tricky, I must admit, and point motors would need careful handling.

Edited by Harlequin
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's amazing @Harlequin thanks so much for knocking that up! Think I'm more or less decided that a continuous run although possible is not going to give me the realistic modelling I'm keen to try and achieve.

 

On-wards now to deciding what I would to include on the layout and then onto a track plan!

 

Many thanks again,

Andy 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/04/2020 at 23:38, Harlequin said:

 

Something like this in broad outline:

638345978_AndyMacSeven2.png.8e91330560a2541dea03ca130bd00f0a.png

 

Or you could have a smaller, conventional fiddle yard, with the branch terminus in front of it, like David Jenkinson's Marthwaite Mark 1 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Rather than worry about what won't go around a R1 curve consider what will.

 

We all have space constraints and too many say this or that cannot be done which puts off those who do not use a bit of brain power.

 

Most of the newer small locomotives and, GOK we are overrun with small four coupled models at present, will trundle around R1 all day.

 

There is a certain Muddle shoppe in Newton Abbot BEKRO that has in the window a modernish Diesel running slowly around R1 yes it has been modified BUT it does it 8 hours a day 6 days a week...

 

Elsewhere on this site there is comment on the Hornby DS48 running happily around a 7" radius curve. Bachmann's Wickham, the Hornby Pug and Pecket, the Dapol Sentinel and much else besides will run around R1. Unfitted private owner stock will also go around what modern bogie stock won't.

 

There is a plan of Yarmouth South Quay somewhere on this site which dates from a Wailway Toddle of 1970s vintage and that proposes a 9 or 10 radius corner with small tight radius point work all squeezed onto a 4 x 2 baseboard. A working exhibition model was constructed and ran successfully using short 0-6-0 and 0-4-0 locomotives.

 

So before stating it can't be done, it most likely can but with a few constraints. All it needs is a proper design and also a prototype that never ran at high speed.

 

There is something very satisfying about setting a small loco with 6 or 8 open vagons or wans into motion and watching it rattle over points disappear into a tunnel to reappear and potter about the layout appearing and disappearing in the landscape clambering up gradients to descend to the level before returning to the start.

 

Providing a sense of journey to the viewer and operator.

 

If you are happy to settle for an industrial layout then currently the world is you mollusc...

 

There may not be the glamour of mainline high speeds, sometimes we sell out to the glamour of the "Race to the North" and ignore the operation of dock, quayside, gasworks and quarry railways, places where the real money was earned by small busy locomotives.

  • Like 4
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming late to this, but I cant help thinking that if the original poster hasnt invested much capital in rolling stock yet, that if the space constraint is truly fixed, this space would be better in N gauge.

 

When I started my layout I had a local enthusiast visit my loft and was very blase that fitting an oo layout in it would be child's play. In fact, I had millimetres to play with to fit third radius curves between the support timbers and the same threading sidings. If I had taken my own advice I would have built in N and enjoyed a lot more flexibility in layout building. Actually what I have built is OK, I dont feel the need to knock it down. But said enthusiast isnt terribly welcome.

 

Only at the planning stage do you have the luxury of thinking like this. For example in N you will get parallel tracks around the 2' section if you want. There will be space for scenery too.

  • Like 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One way to get a little bit more clearance on the edges of the baseboard could be to use 1 and a 1/2 second radius curves as transition pieces at each side of a 1st radius curve in the centre.  A single piece of first radius may not restrict larger locos. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Thanks for all of the replies folks. After some serious consideration on my must have's and protracted negotiations with the wife I've gone down a totally different route with a 14ft x 5ft area which will allow me to get a continuous run in without any difficulty, I'm happy enough to trade off on what will probably inevitable be some "train set" curves in that space especially if I can hide them fully or partially in a tunnel. 

 

Unfortunately I was part way through board construction when the plans changes so my 5ft depth is made up of 3ft deep boards on the back side, a 40cm deep operating well and then a 20cm section of board. It's not ideal but I've got a good idea of what I want to put on there. 

 

Thanks again,

Andy

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/08/2020 at 13:36, AndyMac7 said:

Thanks for all of the replies folks. After some serious consideration on my must have's and protracted negotiations with the wife I've gone down a totally different route with a 14ft x 5ft area which will allow me to get a continuous run in without any difficulty, I'm happy enough to trade off on what will probably inevitable be some "train set" curves in that space especially if I can hide them fully or partially in a tunnel. 

 

Unfortunately I was part way through board construction when the plans changes so my 5ft depth is made up of 3ft deep boards on the back side, a 40cm deep operating well and then a 20cm section of board. It's not ideal but I've got a good idea of what I want to put on there. 

 

Thanks again,

Andy

Personally I'd sit in the well rather than try to wear the layout as some form of ballerina's tutu...so you may still be thinking this through.

 

Your projected 40 cms (16") operating well is possibly comfortably tight for those entering the mid-life body mass redistribution.

 

Take a look at CJF 60 Plans for small layouts... Plan SP5 on page 4 shows what is feasible in a very small space in this case a 4'6" square. It gives three 'train' capacity clockwise and/or anti clockwise operation and ruling radius is R2, albeit one at a time...

 

Although it more likely to be a DMU centric layout as there is not space for an 8-car express and scant space for a modern 2-car DMU.

 

The CJF plan would, however, extend to 14' x 4'6" with a 600mm operating well, which might work up to a better design.

 

If you used a dumb-bell layout for your track and had your station as a 2 or possibly  4 faced item along one side. It would be possible to produce a 'wraparound console' operating area with the loops at either end but you will be up against reducing the four lines to two for entry and exit to the station from the loops without using a plenitude of curved points.

 

Paul Lunn designed a 'console' layout with end to end plus a nice piece of complex junction pointwork in the middle this was designed to drop onto a nominal 6x3 space your 14' x 5' would open a whole world of possibilities for the original plan and might be workable in O-gauge...although it is not roundy roundy it's worthy of consideration.

 

It would answer most access issues close out the operating well and generally be feasible for two operators

 

May also mean the end of a yard to fiddle about with your stock.

 

It's very swings and roundabouts.

 

 

Edited by Sturminster_Newton
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.