Jump to content

Chilly

Shot down by the wife then ..............

Recommended Posts

Well my original plan (see earlier threads) did not pass by the Anti-Fun police however this did.!

 

The track will be Peco OO 100, DC only and set track will be used for the ends with flexi for the other bits.

 

The layout will run around the room on a shelf of 1ft width except where it widens to 2ft which will accommodate the stations and turntables.Final.jpg.3bf4b3753b7fcd4cc0a574abe46d8380.jpg

 

The top run will be c20ft, the staggered bend c13.5ft and the return at the bottom 17ft.

 

The stations will be on the straights before the turntable with island platforms in the loops with bridges across.

 

My theory is that I can run a train into the station uncouple, spin it round on the turntable and pass the parked carriages on the vacant track and shunt back to them to pick them up and off again. This appears that it might work on this layouts for both inner and outer tracks. So a conceptual heritage railway in the Pickering to Whitby ish and by a long stretch of the imagination bearing in mind no turntables on theirs I think.

 

I was thinking of using 9mm ply for the baseboard on brackets, so off the floor by 3 1/2 feet.

 

Any tips or advice gratefully received especially on the wiring, just pleased that it has passed muster with the wife assuming it works !

 

ATB Chilly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Chilly said:

I was thinking of using 9mm ply for the baseboard on brackets, so off the floor by 3 1/2 feet.

 

Any tips or advice gratefully received especially on the wiring, just pleased that it has passed muster with the wife assuming it works !

 

So, like many it appears that you will be sharing the room with other purposes/people, so the following comments are based on that assumption.

 

To that end, some forward planning on not typical layout stuff may pay off long term.

 

The first is to make sure that the layout is presentable - this means that it's appearance is neat and tidy - think a pleasing to look at fascia that hides the under-baseboard mess, likely painted a colour that suits the room's other purposes (perhaps get the household boss involved in choosing the colour).  Spend some money on the presentation so the entire layout looks consistent (and hence blends in and "disappears" into the room), which can only bring long term benefits as the layout is less likely to generate resentment over time by the other household occupant(s).

 

This means planning storage - whether in this room or elsewhere, so you don't leave tools, etc laying around between build or operating times.  The golden rule, as such, will be to have the layout always in some form of presentable whenever it is not being worked on or operated so the sudden arrival of visitors/need to be used for the room's other purpose isn't a "oops, just need to tidy up first" problem.

 

Also, plan the initial build.  You won't get all the scenery done at once, but the initial build of putting up the shelving and making it "presentable" should be aimed to be done in as short a period of time as possible to reduce disruption amongst others (in other words, don't make it a 6 weekend project spread over 6 years, and try to avoid having to stop part way because you are missing some supplies and they are back ordered).  But at the same time don't rush things, remember it needs to look neat and presentable long term - just do the best to minimize the disruption and ugliness of the baseboard construction/installation.

 

What is going to happen / what is the use of the space beneath the layout?  That will influence things.  Some modellers in the US have started to US Ikea components, which help make the layout more presentable (particularly when painted/stained an appropriate colour).  See for example this layout blog, where some parts use Ikea Shelving and other parts mounted to the wall, all designed to blend together in something that looks good in a public space (you don't need to go with Ikea, but perhaps just take inspiration from the idea).

 

http://centralvermontrailway.blogspot.com/2018/09/progress-report-17-september-2018.html

http://centralvermontrailway.blogspot.com/2018/05/ikea-ivar-benchwork-user-report.html

 

(note the involvement of the wife in colour choices).

 

Whatever you either choose for beneath the layout, or the layout needs to clear, will help influence the height decision.

 

Obviously if this is a more utility type space (say a garage), some of this can be relaxed.  But still aim to keep things presentable to keep the other family units happy even if say the colour scheme doesn't matter.

 

Edited by mdvle
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi Mdvle

 

Thanks for your input.

 

The room is a bedroom at the top of the house and has a bed in it, mine - (wife snores or is it me :rolleyes:) and she resides on the 2nd level. This has turned into my man cave or sanctuary and has just been laminated throughout so I have to keep it tidy and spotless so I am told, there is little else in it apart from TV and rowing machine and I would like it to remain that way.

 

The plan is only the shelf layout and some detailing thereon, the shelf will be 3 1/2 ft off the floor and I want that to be well done so will enlist a mate to build, yeah I am that bad at this type of stuff. With it only being 1ft and 2ft width maximum I am hoping brackets from the wall will suffice in a similar vein to a picture shelf so no legs. I am thinking of a thin shallow wooden skirt round it to hide any wires etc, so perhaps 3 inches above and below the edge of the board. 

 

I just want to run the 10 steam engines plus carriages that I have bought over the last 4 weeks (yeah she thinks there are only 3 :D) all based on the NYMR stock. The turntables are there to park the loco's not running at the time and nothing will be stored underneath the shelfs at all, so a completely clear floor as it would be with a picture shelf.

 

I think the layout is basic except the turntable which I need help on for sure, especially the electrics etc. In the lockdown I have surfed frenetically on the net and through the search function on here (some really good stuff on here) but perhaps still need guidance.

 

ATB Chilly 

Edited by Chilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chilly said:

Well my original plan (see earlier threads) did not pass by the Anti-Fun police however this did.!

 

The track will be Peco OO 100, DC only and set track will be used for the ends with flexi for the other bits.

 

The layout will run around the room on a shelf of 1ft width except where it widens to 2ft which will accommodate the stations and turntables.Final.jpg.3bf4b3753b7fcd4cc0a574abe46d8380.jpg

 

The top run will be c20ft, the staggered bend c13.5ft and the return at the bottom 17ft.

 

The stations will be on the straights before the turntable with island platforms in the loops with bridges across.

 

My theory is that I can run a train into the station uncouple, spin it round on the turntable and pass the parked carriages on the vacant track and shunt back to them to pick them up and off again. This appears that it might work on this layouts for both inner and outer tracks. So a conceptual heritage railway in the Pickering to Whitby ish and by a long stretch of the imagination bearing in mind no turntables on theirs I think.

 

I was thinking of using 9mm ply for the baseboard on brackets, so off the floor by 3 1/2 feet.

 

Any tips or advice gratefully received especially on the wiring, just pleased that it has passed muster with the wife assuming it works !

 

ATB Chilly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assuming "North" is at the top of the screen as we look at it:

 

Assuming left-hand running and British practice, because you've got a facing crossover in the neck of the north station, the two uppermost tracks are unusable as anything running into them can be run round but is then obliged to run wrong line (i.e. on the right) back to the other station.  This is not so much of a problem at the South station, where you've got two arrival tracks that can also be departed from plus two departure-only tracks that can be shunted into from the arrival tracks.

 

Having the turntable at the end of the line would be unlikely to be signed off on safety grounds

 

Most heritage railways (in fact, all except one) are single track.  Reducing your track to single track would allow room for a little more scenery, and maybe a passing loop half-way.

 

You need to use flexitrack on the corners.  The set-track curves and straights combination is not pleasing.

 

Both stations are very much alike operationally and scenically.  Is this really what you want?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As @TonyMay says the station are awkward.  I would avoid  set track points as they waste width and some modern RTR can't get round 2nd radius.  Peco streamine  2ft / 7" points are no longer but significantly narrower but 3ft medium or the long ones look much better .

The turntable arrangement is fine for Hidden sidings but not prototypical except for miniature railways 15" gauge and the like. 

It's a bit of a difficult situation to squeeze a turntable onto a 2ft board but I doodled something on AnyRail and FastStome image viewer to represent a preservation era terminus with  2 platforms 3 carriage sidings and a turntable with loco spurs for the top station. The yellow lines indicate where 2 feet could be chopped out, total length is 16 feet. Upper a bit Pickering ish sort if flipped and lower a bit Grosmont ish minus Whitby end and tunnel, Scissors used to be there pre 2000.

Lower has loco shed + TT  in corner 17 ft long

 

 

Screenshot (310)b.png

Screenshot (311).png

Edited by DavidCBroad
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Why code 100, code 75 looks better, BH even better but more expensive.

2. Consider an eye level layout (while standing that is).  Because, a) it looks better, a more natural viewing angle, and b) you can make betteruse of the height underneath, eg. a workbench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I should add that only 1 preserved line has turning facilities at both of its termini, and only one of those is a turntable - the other one is a triangle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Take a look at the track plan for Alston station back in BR  days. It was a bit similar with a turntable at the end of the platforms.

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The layout has been somewhat amended to David's design.

Next problem is how do I wire this up in DC with 2 controllers?

Where are the powers to go plus droppers?

The insulation for points switching polarity ?

The turntable electrics?

Will I be heading for divorce with the cost :D

Help

Chilly

 

Pickmont.jpg.e75b40011d44af1d379225068386da94.jpg

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chilly said:

The layout has been somewhat amended to David's design.

Next problem is how do I wire this up in DC with 2 controllers?

Where are the powers to go plus droppers?

The insulation for points switching polarity ?

The turntable electrics?

Will I be heading for divorce with the cost :D

Help

Chilly

 

Pickmont.jpg.e75b40011d44af1d379225068386da94.jpg

 

 

Is the headshunt in the northern station long enough for your longest loco?  (probably a 9F or a Princess).  It looks a bit short.

 

Also, at the north station, is the loop long enough for the trains you want to run?  Again, looks rather short.

 

Again, single track is also probably better than double given the space and prototype.

 

I'd also consider having one of the ends (probably the northern one) as a fiddle yard.

 

The scissor crossing requires a bit of point hacking to get the spacing right.  But if you go for single track you won't need it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ‘turntable at the end’ arrangement was very common in the mid-Victorian period, but was largely superseded as locos got bigger. A few were left to the very end, at places where traffic didn’t really grow, but not all that many.

 

Oddly, some of the best surviving examples are in Spain, where the C19th railways were laid-out by British engineers.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tony

 

Very good point regarding single track, I will have a hack about on Scarm keeping the outer track to see what it looks like and post.

 

I have the large loco's from the NYMR with Nigel Gresley arriving soon.

 

I have 3 sets of 4 carriages appropriate for that railway such as the maroon and teaks.

 

The smaller stuff are the 4mt's and Joem.  

 

The electrics would appear to be simplified quite a bit, would I now get away with a single controller bearing in mind DC layout?

 

When you say fiddle yard what do you have in mind, I suppose it could be made more Grosmont'ish.

 

I suppose a later stage if I did go single (not marital status!) I could subsequently add an inner loop at a later date ?

 

Thanks Chilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I would stick with double track, as operationally our options quite restricted, and one thing that would make me happy is seeing trains passing one another "out in the country".

 

If you stay with double track, two crossovers (one facing, one trailing) at each station are essential.  These would typically come immediately before the rest of the station pointwork as part of the throat, as you have them on the upper station in your tweak of David's idea, not at a distance as on the lower.  If you keep the depot at the left hand end of the lower baseboard, the point accessing it would also be better moved along to the station throat, giving a third bi-directional track to the depot, avoiding a long wrong-road run for locos going from depot to station.

 

I'm guessing David put in a scissors crossover at the lower station for variety, and they certainly look smart, but as you're not short of length the problems of acquisition/construction and (possibly) wiring would seem unnecessary complications to me.

 

I would wire it using cab control with 5 or 6 sections - up and down lines "in the country", lower station, lower MPD and approach track, and upper station and upper MPD maybe separate, maybe combined.  The point of cab control is to enable you to run from one station to the other using the same controller throughout.

 

A fiddle yard is just a (usually non-scenic) set of sidings representing the rest of the world.  Enabling you to rearrange stock, reverse or swap locos without the fun/bother of shunting properly.  So run a greater variety of services than could run between two stations not linked to the rest of the world.


Best of luck with the planning authorities!

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chimer said:

Personally, I would stick with double track, as operationally our options quite restricted, and one thing that would make me happy is seeing trains passing one another "out in the country".

 

If you stay with double track, two crossovers (one facing, one trailing) at each station are essential.  These would typically come immediately before the rest of the station pointwork as part of the throat, as you have them on the upper station in your tweak of David's idea, not at a distance as on the lower.  If you keep the depot at the left hand end of the lower baseboard, the point accessing it would also be better moved along to the station throat, giving a third bi-directional track to the depot, avoiding a long wrong-road run for locos going from depot to station.

 

I'm guessing David put in a scissors crossover at the lower station for variety, and they certainly look smart, but as you're not short of length the problems of acquisition/construction and (possibly) wiring would seem unnecessary complications to me.

 

I would wire it using cab control with 5 or 6 sections - up and down lines "in the country", lower station, lower MPD and approach track, and upper station and upper MPD maybe separate, maybe combined.  The point of cab control is to enable you to run from one station to the other using the same controller throughout.

 

A fiddle yard is just a (usually non-scenic) set of sidings representing the rest of the world.  Enabling you to rearrange stock, reverse or swap locos without the fun/bother of shunting properly.  So run a greater variety of services than could run between two stations not linked to the rest of the world.


Best of luck with the planning authorities!

 

Chris

Thanks Chris for your input

 

I will revise the track plan taking your comments on board.

 

Scarm is so addictive that I have done a single track as Tony has suggested above.

 

I will have 3 possibilities when I have amended the version above to incorporate your input and will post all 3 together.

 

The wife appears placid and distracted at the moment as she is buying stuff on Ikea, her e-mails come up on my laptop :lol: and my bank card is with me so bonus she is spending her own money :D

 

I will aim to post them tomorrow, I do want to keep the electrics as simple as possible as I can't persuade her to get interested in doing it for me … tch some women :rolleyes:

 

Cheers Chilly

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

The ‘turntable at the end’ arrangement was very common in the mid-Victorian period, but was largely superseded as locos got bigger. A few were left to the very end, at places where traffic didn’t really grow, but not all that many.

 

Oddly, some of the best surviving examples are in Spain, where the C19th railways were laid-out by British engineers.

 

The basic idea is functionally quite sound and works quite well for fiddle yards, but it's not really prototypical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever you do, I would try to have the two termini different in character. Maybe have one without a run round so you have to shunt release or change locos. Perhaps one would be a two platform station with a central release road. Maybe one would have one long platform and a shorter one, like Ilfracombe (and so many other model termini)... If you're thinking of a heritage operation then maybe one end is a former through station that's been adapted (as well as Pickering, think Loughborough Central, Alresford, Bridgenorth...).

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/05/2020 at 04:08, DavidCBroad said:

As @TonyMay says the station are awkward.  I would avoid  set track points as they waste width and some modern RTR can't get round 2nd radius.  Peco streamine  2ft / 7" points are no longer but significantly narrower but 3ft medium or the long ones look much better .

The turntable arrangement is fine for Hidden sidings but not prototypical except for miniature railways 15" gauge and the like. 

It's a bit of a difficult situation to squeeze a turntable onto a 2ft board but I doodled something on AnyRail and FastStome image viewer to represent a preservation era terminus with  2 platforms 3 carriage sidings and a turntable with loco spurs for the top station. The yellow lines indicate where 2 feet could be chopped out, total length is 16 feet. Upper a bit Pickering ish sort if flipped and lower a bit Grosmont ish minus Whitby end and tunnel, Scissors used to be there pre 2000.

Lower has loco shed + TT  in corner 17 ft long

 

 

Screenshot (310)b.png

Screenshot (311).png

 

18 hours ago, Chimer said:

Personally, I would stick with double track, as operationally our options quite restricted, and one thing that would make me happy is seeing trains passing one another "out in the country".

 

If you stay with double track, two crossovers (one facing, one trailing) at each station are essential.  These would typically come immediately before the rest of the station pointwork as part of the throat, as you have them on the upper station in your tweak of David's idea, not at a distance as on the lower.  If you keep the depot at the left hand end of the lower baseboard, the point accessing it would also be better moved along to the station throat, giving a third bi-directional track to the depot, avoiding a long wrong-road run for locos going from depot to station.

 

I'm guessing David put in a scissors crossover at the lower station for variety, and they certainly look smart, but as you're not short of length the problems of acquisition/construction and (possibly) wiring would seem unnecessary complications to me.

 

I would wire it using cab control with 5 or 6 sections - up and down lines "in the country", lower station, lower MPD and approach track, and upper station and upper MPD maybe separate, maybe combined.  The point of cab control is to enable you to run from one station to the other using the same controller throughout.

 

A fiddle yard is just a (usually non-scenic) set of sidings representing the rest of the world.  Enabling you to rearrange stock, reverse or swap locos without the fun/bother of shunting properly.  So run a greater variety of services than could run between two stations not linked to the rest of the world.


Best of luck with the planning authorities!

 

Chris

 

10 hours ago, Zomboid said:

Whatever you do, I would try to have the two termini different in character. Maybe have one without a run round so you have to shunt release or change locos. Perhaps one would be a two platform station with a central release road. Maybe one would have one long platform and a shorter one, like Ilfracombe (and so many other model termini)... If you're thinking of a heritage operation then maybe one end is a former through station that's been adapted (as well as Pickering, think Loughborough Central, Alresford, Bridgenorth...).

 

10 hours ago, TonyMay said:

 

The basic idea is functionally quite sound and works quite well for fiddle yards, but it's not really prototypical.

 

Right Chaps

 

I have taken on board your comments 1st pic double track (I think my fav) and 2nd single track.

 

On pic 1 just wondering about the bottom station end with the 3 point switch at the end however it does appear to afford the ability to run loco to end and then return back on the centre track.  

 

Will the double track ?

 

On both bottom left turntable this could perhaps be location of a loco shed.

 

Top left just thinking of a house or two there.

 

Any more suggestions more than appreciated.

 

Thanks Chilly

 

 


The bottom station on Pic 2 59289233_PickmontDCZ.jpg.03358f9dd040ad23aa059adabb5b4b62.jpg

 

1293344228_PickmontSingleTrack.jpg.7845e25abf7eca7e6550a3c95647f875.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would amend option 1 bottom left as per scribble, and possibly even have a slight gradient there so the depot is an inch or so above the main line.  Also reverse the point formation circled in red in the bottom station, i.e. have the 3-way pointing the same way as the one in the throat.  That means you can leave your coaches nearer the buffers when running round, and increases the usable platform length.  I do think that central release road is a neat idea.

 

This could work really well with two operators, one at each station ….

 

Chilly2.jpg.9e9dfb354e6d29270ef4f001c12e02f1.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2p-worth;

Stick with double track - without a passing loop halfway for opposing trains to pass, you're stuck with one train at a time on a single line. 

I'd keep the southern turntable, if this is a Heritage line some of them only have one, e.g. Kidderminster on the SVR & Minehead on the WSR, and lose the north one which looks a bit awkward to me, and would allow the station plan to straighten out a bit.

I was also going to mention the loco release points in the south station but Chimer beat me to it. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, F-UnitMad said:

My 2p-worth;

Stick with double track - without a passing loop halfway for opposing trains to pass, you're stuck with one train at a time on a single line. 

I'd keep the southern turntable, if this is a Heritage line some of them only have one, e.g. Kidderminster on the SVR & Minehead on the WSR, and lose the north one which looks a bit awkward to me, and would allow the station plan to straighten out a bit.

I was also going to mention the loco release points in the south station but Chimer beat me to it. ;)

Hi F-Unitmad

 

I have amended it please see picture, is this what you mean?

 

It does skinny the board down a bit as well, not done that yet.

Unsure what you mean by loco release point, as you can tell a very green newbie!

 

Thanks Chilly

 

395123988_PickmontDCZF.jpg.a1424484bb931b4b2c36ad922a72263a.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chilly said:

Unsure what you mean by loco release point, as you can tell a very green newbie!

The loco release is the part Chimer circled in red, south station. It needs leaving in place, but turning the other way i.e. the same way as the 3-way at the start of those platforms, to allow a loco to pull it's train into the platform, stopping with the coaches short of the points. It can then uncouple, run to the buffer stops, then reverse up the centre road past the coaches to the turntable, or  recouple to the 'new' front of the train.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

The loco release is the part Chimer circled in red, south station. It needs leaving in place, but turning the other way i.e. the same way as the 3-way at the start of those platforms, to allow a loco to pull it's train into the platform, stopping with the coaches short of the points. It can then uncouple, run to the buffer stops, then reverse up the centre road past the coaches to the turntable, or  recouple to the 'new' front of the train.

 

Thanks F-Unitmad

 

Shown below.

This could be nearly there would you amend the top station or leave as is to give a slight difference to the bottom one?

 

Thanks Chilly

 

1563039792_PickmontDCZF1.jpg.37fa3532df6c7972f6aac471e8d44dfb.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

North station platforms might be a bit short perhaps.  I'd have thought you would want a good 4' clear of any pointwork.  With the depot gone, the throat could easily move left a couple of feet.  And you've thinned the boards down quite a bit from your first incarnations of this basic plan - don't surrender any more than the authorities insist on - a couple of inches more width in the south-east corner especially would help the station scenics.

Edited by Chimer
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/05/2020 at 00:04, Chilly said:

Will I be heading for divorce with the cost 

Only if she finds out the cost...

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Chimer said:

North station platforms might be a bit short perhaps.  I'd have thought you would want a good 4' clear of any pointwork.  With the depot gone, the throat could easily move left a couple of feet.  And you've thinned the boards down quite a bit from your first incarnations of this basic plan - don't surrender any more than the authorities insist on - a couple of inches more width in the south-east corner especially would help the station scenics.

 

48 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Only if she finds out the cost...

Hi Chimer

 

I was thinking that myself so tweaked it and the yard what do you think?

Could maybe take the small section out of the top section before the 1st point leading to the three sidings and thereby lengthening the sidings ?

 

Parts list 

 

 

1LK‑55TurntableOOPeco1 

2SL‑100Flex/WoodOOPeco67Covered by 41 pcs. full-length Flex/Wood (SL‑100)

3SL‑91SL‑91 (S)OOPeco1 

4SL‑92SL‑92 (S)OOPeco1 

5SL‑E91SL‑E91 (S)OOPeco6 

6SL‑E92SL‑E92 (S)OOPeco7 

7SL‑E99SL‑E99 (M)OOPeco2 

 

Total:85Tracks count: 85

 

191683151_PickmontDCZFv3.jpg.2eec199f2916ac5d38fd9d025a297b8c.jpg

 

Edited by Chilly

Share this post


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.