Jump to content
 

New-ish-bie, restarting after 30 years!


Adwoot
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am in the head-planning stage of starting a new OO layout, and to be honest am confused by the wealth of options available compared with the late 1980s as I want to build something which is future-proofed, but considering a (lack of) time and budget and electrical skills want to start with something relatively ready-to-run.  I have a small fleet of 70s/80s Hornby and Lima locos in various states of repair along with some newer mid-2000s units which I have never run, which I will eventually upgrade to DCC but not in the near future.

 

I'm not modelling a particular era or location, and the initial build will be primarily basic track with upgrades and scenery to come along later.  I'm a fan of high-speed running with occasional station stops rather than a busy yard or station scene.  Layout will start as an approx. 17ft x 24ft double track oval, with a couple of features such as a branch line and terminus station running off the main loop.  I don't have a good model shop nearby, so initially I am very much reliant on online advice and research.

 

I've had a good trawl of these extensive forums, but still have a few questions where advice would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance for any help given :-)

 

DC with futureproof for DCC - Best way to do this in terms of simple electrics? I'm familiar with isolating sections and the way the older Hornby points worked but don't quite understand things such as "live frog points", for example.

 

I note there is frequent mention of wiring up all the track with drop pins, but what is a good compromise?  Also with points, intend to install with traditional dc motors and switch control (and no intention to DCC these ever) so I'm assuming this will no present no issues once I move my stock to DCC control?

 

Regarding track, I am confused with "Code 100" etc.  Basically I would like modular track with concrete sleepers for the main runs, but choices seem to be limited with points and so on.  Any recommends, and for standard running which "Code" is the best?  Are Hornby and Peco components interchangeable, or any other recommended manufacturers?

 

I've learned a lot today about design software options and have a few layout ideas in mind, and also materials for the baseboard, so really is about understanding the practicalities of build to get up and running relatively quickly, and without storing up problems for the future!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Well, I’m no died in the wool expert, but have followed a similar rebirth to you, albeit my gap was 50 years. I started again 18 months ago with OO DCC using a mixture of code 100 streamline and settrack for tighter curves. So here’s a few things I’ve learnt....

 

Code 100 is the popular choice, with such as code 75 being a more prototypical rail profile. One issue to consider re this choice is if your older stock (may have ‘coarser’ wheel standards) may not like running through code 75 points. Indeed, I found some older stock didn’t like my code 100 points. Code 100 streamline (flexi) is entirely compatible with settrack 100, but the former gives extra choice between live and insulfrog points, and indeed types and shapes of points. I think most folk would say you are likely to get better running with live frog points, simply because of the avoidance of plastic running lines (ie the dead frog).

 

Using DC points control will not have any effect on converting loco power to DCC. The multiple dropper connections to the power bus is good practice for both DC and DCC but has more benefit for DCC with its ability to control locos independently, and indeed for running stationary sound /lighting locos. If you create isolating sections for dc, then they should be ok for DCC, except that you would probably leave them permanently on.
 

in overall terms, that is a large layout, so it might be worth starting with a small element of it, to gain experience en route as it were.

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Adwoot said:

I am in the head-planning stage of starting a new OO layout, and to be honest am confused by the wealth of options available compared with the late 1980s as I want to build something which is future-proofed, but considering a (lack of) time and budget and electrical skills want to start with something relatively ready-to-run.  I have a small fleet of 70s/80s Hornby and Lima locos in various states of repair along with some newer mid-2000s units which I have never run, which I will eventually upgrade to DCC but not in the near future.

 

I'm not modelling a particular era or location, and the initial build will be primarily basic track with upgrades and scenery to come along later.  I'm a fan of high-speed running with occasional station stops rather than a busy yard or station scene.  Layout will start as an approx. 17ft x 24ft double track oval, with a couple of features such as a branch line and terminus station running off the main loop.  I don't have a good model shop nearby, so initially I am very much reliant on online advice and research.

 

I've had a good trawl of these extensive forums, but still have a few questions where advice would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance for any help given :-)

 

DC with futureproof for DCC - Best way to do this in terms of simple electrics? I'm familiar with isolating sections and the way the older Hornby points worked but don't quite understand things such as "live frog points", for example.

 

I note there is frequent mention of wiring up all the track with drop pins, but what is a good compromise?  Also with points, intend to install with traditional dc motors and switch control (and no intention to DCC these ever) so I'm assuming this will no present no issues once I move my stock to DCC control?

 

Regarding track, I am confused with "Code 100" etc.  Basically I would like modular track with concrete sleepers for the main runs, but choices seem to be limited with points and so on.  Any recommends, and for standard running which "Code" is the best?  Are Hornby and Peco components interchangeable, or any other recommended manufacturers?

 

I've learned a lot today about design software options and have a few layout ideas in mind, and also materials for the baseboard, so really is about understanding the practicalities of build to get up and running relatively quickly, and without storing up problems for the future!

 

Adwoot,

 

I was in your position about 3 years ago; a fleet of 1980s diesels and rolling stock from Hornby, Airfix, and Lima and no trackwork. Back then I never had the money or space (rented bedsit!) to built a layout. Now, 40 years later, I'm embarking on my first (and probably only) layout using all the rolling stock I already had.

 

You can read all about my efforts at 

 or using the link in the footer below.

 

I would recommend going with DCC from the start. It's not difficult 'upgrading' older locomotives to DCC, and just involves cheap DCC modules and a bit of wire cutting / soldering. This brings plenty of flexibility to the layout and 'future proofs' it as well. It's good fun as well. I even added some headcode / rear lights to my old diesels.

 

DCC does seem to involve a lot more wiring, but that wiring is very simple; just 2 wires to each track section. If you follow the mantra 'black to back' (assuming red / black colour wires) you'll be fine.

 

As you are using old 1980s locomotives, they will have limited power pickups meaning that electrofrog turnouts would be much better suited. I've also retrofitted additional pickups to my 1980s locos to improve running.

 

One thing I would seriously consider is planning, lots of it. I've planned and drawn out my layout before each stage to iron out any problems and this enabled the actual construction to be a painless experience. I've had almost no major issues and not had to rebuild or relay any elements so far. I even drew out the under-baseboard wiring on the first 6 baseboards to give me the confidence to install it without errors. Now I have enough experience to do it without a drawing.

All my wiring uses plugs / sockets (very little soldering) and this is great for troubleshooting, as you can simply unplug bits to isolate faults. I had a short-circuit somewhere on my lower level baseboards, but each of the 10 baseboards were linked with jumper cables. I just unplugged the lot and gradually re-linked them until the fault re-appeared. It turned out to be short on the underside of a small veroboard I'd used.

 

I hope the above has helped in some small way.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ISW said:

Adwoot,

 

I was in your position about 3 years ago; a fleet of 1980s diesels and rolling stock from Hornby, Airfix, and Lima and no trackwork. Back then I never had the money or space (rented bedsit!) to built a layout. Now, 40 years later, I'm embarking on my first (and probably only) layout using all the rolling stock I already had.

 

 

Thanks Ian, I will have a good read through and probably have more questions!  I'm ok with some wiring, my comfort zone ends when reading about needing resistors or more complicated things which require a more in-depth knowledge of components.  Certainly food for thought about going straight to DCC, I don't have a huge fleet but I know a bit of electrical surgery is required and I've never been very good at soldering or modifying things.

 

I've got plenty of time to read and research, next step for me will be starting design and provided I have no major unplanned time diversions, the first real-life work is pencilled in for the autumn.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome. I'm back in the hobby for a little over two years after a 35 year hiatus. I didn't have anything older to start with though as I got rid of all of that in the late '80's. DCC was just being talked about back in the early '80's then and wasn't generally available, though experimenters were tinkering with various circuits.

 

DCC is much easier to wire that DC for a complex layout. Of course, you can make it as complex as you like, but it's no longer required to separate sections into blocks with a spaghetti bowl of wiring to contend with attached to banks of slide switches to control the blocks.

 

Some still do this for signalling and control, but the switch banks are no longer required.

 

DCC sound equipped locomotives really excited me when I got back into the hobby and still does. They had nothing like this back then. It was difficult to run two trains on the same track too, as each wanted power from the transformer and effectively halved your available current. Not so with DCC. I can run and control (and have once or twice) up to six trains in motion with my DCC controller. Six is really pushing my ability to keep up with them though as my layout is not a super-mega land tract that required it's own tax bill, but it is large enough to run three or four at a time safely.

 

I usually run two on one mainline and another on the second main with one waiting to go at a station siding. The mountain spur usually has one going too, but I don't have to attend that train like the others.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ITG said:

Well, I’m no died in the wool expert, but have followed a similar rebirth to you, albeit my gap was 50 years. I started again 18 months ago with OO DCC using a mixture of code 100 streamline and settrack for tighter curves. So here’s a few things I’ve learnt....

 

 

Thanks ITG, that's very helpful.  More food for thought!  I'm glad I seem to have the right basics in mind, though need to dig deeper on the approach to wiring and whether to start with DCC for control from the outset.  Most of my stock is "heritage" so Code 100 might be the way to go, I'm not too concerned about being prototypical as reliability is the bigger priority.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Adwoot said:

 

Thanks ITG, that's very helpful.  More food for thought!  I'm glad I seem to have the right basics in mind, though need to dig deeper on the approach to wiring and whether to start with DCC for control from the outset.  Most of my stock is "heritage" so Code 100 might be the way to go, I'm not too concerned about being prototypical as reliability is the bigger priority.

 

Well, all I can say is that I have been very impressed by the functionality and flexibility of DCC. Personally, I could never go back to DC, but I did have the benefit of starting afresh, so I had no added cost of converting multiple DC locos. (Though did have to buy anew!)

i have found slow running (shunting etc) much better than I ever did all those years ago. Can’t say that is entirely down to DCC, although a visiting friend or two has also commented favourably compared to their DC layouts.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Adwoot. Back in for a few years after a long break (seems quite common), ostensibly to assist my nephew,  but watching YouTube and going to shows really inspired me to return.

DCC is definitely the way to go if you are starting afresh. Pick a good quality control system. They are modular so you can add other functionalities as you progress.

Do visit your local club, the help I received there was excellent. You can trade skills, so you may be able to do something for someone who will help you with chipping your old loco's. 

Code 100 would be your best track option with older stock.

There are so many 'how to' videos on YouTube, it is really easy to see how to do things.

Practice and research should always be carried out to maximise results.

Start small and get your eye in before going big, practice makes perfect. 

 

I am building a shunting puzzle, 1.6m x 0.4m as my first proper sceniced layout. I am adding lighting and making a mimic panel, both firsts for me. Luckily,  I managed to get all of the materials together before the lockdown.  Subject to a delivery, I think I might have it all ready by the end of the month. 

 

The big plan is a 16' x 10' layout, which has gone through about 20 significantly different versions over the last year or so.

 

Welcome back to the hobby, there are so many aspects to enjoy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, simmo009 said:

Hi Adwoot. Back in for a few years after a long break (seems quite common), ostensibly to assist my nephew,  but watching YouTube and going to shows really inspired me to return.

DCC is definitely the way to go if you are starting afresh. Pick a good quality control system.

Do visit your local club, the help I received there was excellent. You can trade skills, so you may be able to do something for someone who will help you with chipping your old loco's. 

Code 100 would be your best track option with older stock.

There are so many 'how to' videos on YouTube, it is really easy to see how to do things.

Practice and research should always be carried out to maximise results.

Start small and get your eye in before going big, practice makes perfect. 

 

Welcome back to the hobby, there are so many aspects to enjoy.

Some excellent advice. 
On my return to the hobby after decades I visited my local club and was lucky enough to purchase for a nominal sum a very small DC layout they were clearing out. I ran this for a year or so with my new DCC Kit and  learned so much before starting to construct my own big (well 8'6"" square!) layout. 

So yes Code 100 if you want to run old stock, start with  DCC from a DCC specialist company, and join a club if you have a local one. 

And RM web has friendly helpful folk too. Never been a better time to be part of the creative and enjoyable hobby. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 13/05/2020 at 17:11, Adwoot said:

I'm not modelling a particular era or location, and the initial build will be primarily basic track with upgrades and scenery to come along later.  I'm a fan of high-speed running with occasional station stops rather than a busy yard or station scene.  Layout will start as an approx. 17ft x 24ft double track oval, with a couple of features such as a branch line and terminus station running off the main loop.  I don't have a good model shop nearby, so initially I am very much reliant on online advice and research.

 

Regarding track, I am confused with "Code 100" etc.  Basically I would like modular track with concrete sleepers for the main runs, but choices seem to be limited with points and so on.  Any recommends, and for standard running which "Code" is the best?  Are Hornby and Peco components interchangeable, or any other recommended manufacturers?


Hi Adwoot, welcome aboard!  I can’t comment on DCC or wiring, but two points of advice I’ve found helpful, so pass on:

 

As barrymx5 says, older rolling stock may assume you have Code 100 track (Code basically refers to rail height - Code 100 is the biggest, so can cope with the widest wheels and biggest flanges - it is also used for Setrack, making Setrack and Flexitrack interchangeable), so you may save yourself a lot of grief sticking to it: it sounds like it will fit your needs.

 

17’ x 24’ is a big space.  As others have indicated above already, there’s much wisdom in starting with something small to get something running, learn what works best for you and find out which bits of modelling you enjoy most.  One way to do this which I don’t think has been suggested above, but I’ve seen in American track plan books over the years is to build what is effectively a small layout in part of your space - and then expand it.  Back in the day, the Gorre and Daphetid of John Allen - an amazing basement railroad from about the 1960s, had done just that.

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Adwoot,

 

Hornby and Peco Settrack can be connected and have the same basic geometry, both can be connected to Code 100 Streamline.

 

For the size of layout you are thinking about, you have the opportunity to create nice sweeping trackwork - so it might be better to avoid the tight radii and sharp angles of the modular Settrack systems (either Peco or Hornby).

 

Peco's Streamline turnouts and crossings are "modular" in the sense they have well defined geometries and can be joined to make useful formations. You would typically use flexitrack with Streamline parts and that's very easy to get to grips with even though its not "modular".

 

Peco make both Code 100 and Code 75 flexitrack with concrete sleepers but the range of turnouts with concrete sleepers is very limited. Only Medium left and right Code 75 turnouts. That is probably good enough to allow you create the majority of modern rationalised mainline track formations, though, with wooden sleepers used in older sidings and branch lines. (Note that Peco don't make any Settrack parts with concrete sleepers - another vote against it.)


Electrofrog turnouts and crossings simply give locos more rail surface where they can pick up power so that as locos drive slowly across them they are less likely to stall. (Peco don't make any electrofrog Settrack parts - yet another vote against it.) You have to use insulating rail joiners strategically with Electrofrog turnouts, but that's all easy to get to grips with.

 

I won't go into the question of modifying Electrofrog turnouts before you install them. Lots of people do this (for both DC and DCC) and there are very good reasons to do it but you don't have to. That's a decision for later.

 

Code 100 rails are bigger (taller) than Code 75 and are out of scale. Code 100 stands out like a sore thumb to my eye and I would try to avoid it. It's usually easy to fit new (metal) wheels with finer flanges that will run on Code 75 track to non-powered rolling stock. It's more difficult to change wheels on locos (but not impossible). There are other reasons why older locos might need to be replaced: Split chassis locos are more difficult to adapt to DCC, the cast alloy ("Mazak") is known to break down in some models, plastic gears split, plastic bearings split, some old motors don't work well with DCC decoders because of the way that decoders supply power to them. And of course, modern models are a huge step ahead in the quality of details and liveries. So sticking with Code 100 to run old stock might not be the right decision in the long run (and if you really want concrete sleepered turnouts you have to use Code 75 anyway).

 

You can just plug a DCC controller into a traditionally wired DC layout and it will work. You would usually turn all the section switches on because you would no longer be relying on them to decide which loco moves - that will now be done by the DCC controller. So your control panel becomes mostly redundant. To make it possible to remove the control panel when you change to DCC you need to make sure that every piece of track has it's own power feed ("dropper wires"), i.e. it doesn't get it's power only through a set of points. Then when you change to DCC you can just connect all the power feeds to a simpler control panel that just contains a few switches that power up whole areas of the layout to help with fault finding.

 

It's a good idea to give each length of rail it's own power feed and not rely on fishplates alone to feed power from one rail to the next. Again, you don't have to do that and you can rely on fishplates if you want to, with just a few power feeds in strategic places. If you do that it's still possible to add more power feeds ("droppers") later on if you find you need them.

 

If you do give each rail it's own power connection there are a lot of wires under the baseboards and to avoid bringing them all back to your control panel (either DC or DCC) it's a good idea to connect all the droppers in the same switched section together locally, then just bring one pair of wires back to the control area. When the switched sections cover large areas of the layout for DCC the best method of connecting all the power feed droppers together is by running a bigger cable (a "bus" cable) under the area and connecting the droppers to it wherever they are closest. While you are wiring up for DC you could lay the bus cable even though many of the droppers will have to be wired back to the control panel at that stage.

 

(You can see that in some ways it's simpler to just go DCC from the start!)

 

As other have said you can use traditional point motors while your trains are DCC controlled. No problem.


Finally, remembering that this is a layout design forum, would you like to share your current design ideas for your layout?

 

Edited by Harlequin
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Adwoot,

 

Hornby and Peco Settrack can be connected and have the same basic geometry, both can be connected to Code 100 Streamline.

...

 

Finally, remembering that this is a layout design forum, would you like to share your current design ideas for your layout?

 

Hi Phil

 

Thanks for the comprehensive info on track, I definitely have a few things to consider.  One biggie is 100 vs 75, as I've got a few older units (such as the APT) and locos which are in ok working order but could get messy trying to change wheels, and the limited availability of concrete sleepered switches could make the layout look a bit silly as I've ideas for flying high-speed junctions and so on.  Buying a new fleet is very much in the long-term at the moment.

 

And yes, once I've got something tangible to share I'll be very much happy to :-)  All in my head at the moment, I'm mulling over the art of the possible so collating info and building knowledge before I make a proper start on planning.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 minutes ago, Adwoot said:

Hi Phil

 

Thanks for the comprehensive info on track, I definitely have a few things to consider.  One biggie is 100 vs 75, as I've got a few older units (such as the APT) and locos which are in ok working order but could get messy trying to change wheels, and the limited availability of concrete sleepered switches could make the layout look a bit silly as I've ideas for flying high-speed junctions and so on.  Buying a new fleet is very much in the long-term at the moment.

 

And yes, once I've got something tangible to share I'll be very much happy to :-)  All in my head at the moment, I'm mulling over the art of the possible so collating info and building knowledge before I make a proper start on planning.

Hi again,

 

One other thought that I should have remembered because it's come up before in this context is to simply buy a length of Code 75 track and test your stock on it (by pushing it along).

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Hi again,

 

One other thought that I should have remembered because it's come up before in this context is to simply buy a length of Code 75 track and test your stock on it (by pushing it along).

 

 

Stock might run OK on plain track (depth of flanges) but that is no guarantee that it will run through pointwork (flange width/back-to-back). So I would advise buying/borrowing a Code 75 turnout as well.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 13/05/2020 at 17:11, Adwoot said:

I am in the head-planning stage of starting a new OO layout, and to be honest am confused by the wealth of options available compared with the late 1980s as I want to build something which is future-proofed, but considering a (lack of) time and budget and electrical skills want to start with something relatively ready-to-run.  I have a small fleet of 70s/80s Hornby and Lima locos in various states of repair along with some newer mid-2000s units which I have never run, which I will eventually upgrade to DCC but not in the near future.

 

I'm not modelling a particular era or location, and the initial build will be primarily basic track with upgrades and scenery to come along later.  I'm a fan of high-speed running with occasional station stops rather than a busy yard or station scene.  Layout will start as an approx. 17ft x 24ft double track oval, with a couple of features such as a branch line and terminus station running off the main loop.  I don't have a good model shop nearby, so initially I am very much reliant on online advice and research.

 

I've had a good trawl of these extensive forums, but still have a few questions where advice would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance for any help given :-)

 

DC with futureproof for DCC - Best way to do this in terms of simple electrics? I'm familiar with isolating sections and the way the older Hornby points worked but don't quite understand things such as "live frog points", for example.

 

I note there is frequent mention of wiring up all the track with drop pins, but what is a good compromise?  Also with points, intend to install with traditional dc motors and switch control (and no intention to DCC these ever) so I'm assuming this will no present no issues once I move my stock to DCC control?

 

Regarding track, I am confused with "Code 100" etc.  Basically I would like modular track with concrete sleepers for the main runs, but choices seem to be limited with points and so on.  Any recommends, and for standard running which "Code" is the best?  Are Hornby and Peco components interchangeable, or any other recommended manufacturers?

 

I've learned a lot today about design software options and have a few layout ideas in mind, and also materials for the baseboard, so really is about understanding the practicalities of build to get up and running relatively quickly, and without storing up problems for the future!

 

 

Do you have exclusive use of the 17' x 24' space? If so, there are probably more interesting options than just an oval round the edge.

 

And how/where do you access the space. 

 

For a modern high-speed junction, the geometry of Peco trackwork does not really work. So worth looking at other manufacturers products or even the option of building your own from Peco's Individulay Code 82 components. The modern railway has largely abandoned complex pointwork in favour of simple turnouts so this is definitely an option, especially if, as it seems, you don't want too complex a layout.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎13‎/‎05‎/‎2020 at 17:11, Adwoot said:

...considering a (lack of) time and budget ... Layout will start as an approx. 17ft x 24ft double track oval ...

 

...Regarding track, I am confused with "Code 100" etc.  ...

I have just chopped out those three elements, as they are enough for discussion. The budget cannot be that lacking, as the double track oval alone will amount to about 150 feet of plain track. The cheapest way to obtain plain track is to go for flexitrack bought in bulk packs at the cheapest deal on offer. You want it concrete sleeper, and 'universal' in terms of being able to run product made forty years ago.

 

The obvious choice from what is currently available is Peco's code 100 streamline, with concrete sleepers. Two 25 yard boxes will make that circuit, and with any luck some retailer will have it on offer at under a net £1 per foot. (Need to wait for the present economic disruption to end as Peco's manufacturing is stopped, and retailer stocks are low and thus not discounted.) Even after buying the rail joiners that will be a considerable saving over set track pieces to make the same length of run.

 

Now here are some other benefits over set track.

The curves can (should!) be much larger radius, and the improvement in running reliability alone is significant, especially if you want to belt large trains along on the layout.

The points to match cost slightly more than set track points, but come in a better selection of superior product. With the space you have, the 'large radius' will easily fit: look better, and again with the running reliability.

The points offer 'live crossing' and this is what is required as you are going DCC.

 

Downside, you have to learn the how of laying a flexitrack layout. It's not that difficult, with a small stock of the right tools and a little practice. You might find yourself so adept, that you space the sleepers to something better proportioned for OO: unless of course while you are still doing the planning Peco suddenly decide that a better OO flatbottom track system would be a good plan...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No time like the present, so I have sketched out the general idea I have for the layout, based loosely on something I designed for a smaller space about 30 years ago.  


Some caveats, of course, and notes:

  • It is NOT to scale, simply a loose diagram of what will be the starting point for the proper measured/scaled design, and not intended to be prototypical of anything
  • I cannot draw curves, so it merely represents where a curve is planned, not the radius :D
  • Scenics, geographical features, gradients, proper sizing for planned rolling stock etc all to go on the CAD plan. 
  • Low level loop started life as access to a below-board hidden fiddle yard, I may just make it an underground system with stations, with a fiddle yard
  • Should support 5 simultaneous running trains/loops, there could be room for double tracking the high level
  • It will definitely be adjusted a lot as it evolves, shovels will not hit the ground until at least late Autumn and will probably start with the low loop as that is relatively simple to build.

 

Thanks again for everyone's input so far, DCC definitely going to be from the start though have more to consider in terms of track types and so on.

 

Image0002.JPG

Edited by Adwoot
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

To scale or not, you're not going to gain the 3 inches you need to climb from red to blue between the bridge and the crossover on the left hand side …. further comments can wait for the next iteration :)

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Adwoot said:

*snip*

 

Thanks again for everyone's input so far, DCC definitely going to be from the start though have more to consider in terms of track types and so on.

 

Image0002.JPG

Adwoot,

 

That's quite a nice layout. Plenty going on. I like the multi-level approach and plenty of railway bridges.

 

A few observations:

  1. Take care allowing enough length for the ramps / inclines between the levels. As drawn (sketched) there isn't enough length for ramps. The minimum for 2 tracks crossing (a bridge) is ~70mm. At 1in40 that's almost 3 metres.
  2. I don't know if you have access to the perimeter, but if you only have access from the operating well some of the baseboards look very wide. Remember you need to be able to reach for construction and, more importantly, troubleshooting and operations.
  3. Your fiddle yard looks shorter than the stations. I think you may need to relocate the fiddle yard under one of the stations.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not letting the grass grow etc!

DCC is definitely the right decision. Code 100 v 75 really depends on how much old stock you want to run. But we have explored all that. 


Your diagram looks exciting. I think you are right to start with one section to get things running. Too many ambitious schemes are abandoned because the authors lose heart and interest because nothing is moving. 
Your basic idea is like a larger version of my layout which I started almost 10 years ago. My operating sessions are fun but would be improved if I had more storage loops. So my advice would be include as many storage loops as you can reasonably fit in. They can of course be "off scene"

 

Enjoy the planing but try to get something running before too long!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's very ambitious, but you need to draw it to scale to find out how much/ little will fit into your (admittedly rather generous) space. Gradients and points will take up a lot more space than you'd imagine, and you need to consider what you can comfortably reach across to rescue a derailment etc.

 

Do you have any interest in freight operations? There's nothing shown on there too allow much in that way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

As this is to be a 3-level layout, I'll add the following comment, that the vertical transition curves at the bottoms and tops of your gradients must be very gentle and carefully laid, and well away from any pointwork.  This is because RTR locos irrespective of how old or new they are do not have much vertical play in the chassis.  Diesel or Electric locos and multiple units are a bit better because there is some play in the bogie pivots, but the bogies themselves are effectively rigid framed, as are the coupled part of steam loco chassis.  This can cause pickup issues at the bottom transition, as the centre wheels are lifted off the track, but the situation is far more fraught at the top of the incline where, unless the transition is very gentle, the outer wheels can be lifted to the extent that they derail on curves or points.

 

This needs to be taken into account when the steepness of the gradient is being calculated, as a bottom to top point to point average that does not take account of the transitions will make the gradient considerably more steep in the middle section, and this will impact on the length of the trains.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 16/05/2020 at 20:16, Zomboid said:

Do you have any interest in freight operations? There's nothing shown on there too allow much in that way.

Not intending to have much freight, though that could evolve over time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the further comments, yes gradients are going to be biggest challenge to get right on the final plan, and conscious of making all of it accessible.

 

I think the bottom left quarter is too complicated for the space so will likely re-jig once I start proper planning.  And the through station is longer than it needs to be (max train running length probably 6-7 vehicles, or 5 car IET with a bit of flexibility) and can move to the right of indicated position, so that gives some breathing space on the left corner.

 

I have some other permutations in mind I will try (keeping the main features) but will wait for the CAD planning with accurate measurements before experimenting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Thanks again for all the advice so far. I have decided to bite the bullet, and there is now a few small trees' worth of wood in the attic ready to start build later today. 

 

I've decided to start with a basic two track loop on analogue, most definitely a proof of concept, to test my appetite and skill. So no DCC, point motors, or multiple drop wires or isolated sections. It will however be future proofed for the grand plan so the baseboards will be ready for the more ambitious features, and a few hard points for major junctions and inclines. 

 

I'd like to get tracks down before the new year, though I need to master flexitrack as some of curves won't work with Setrack fixed radius. Have decided to go with Code 100 to suit older stock, and Insulfrog for the points (small number on this phase) for simplicity and to suit analogue. 

 

Sadly on inspection, most of my heritage fleet needs a comprehensive overhaul from lack of use (30+ years) so having a traditional set up will make this work simpler, and make them fit for DCC at a later date. 

 

Will post some progress pics and the scale draft plans soon. And it is also being published on Twitter under its working title "High Speed Cymru" - 

 

  • Like 2
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...