Help with track plan

[Joeh260]

Think this is the correct place, I have recently just set up new baseboards for a new 00 gauge layout. However I haven’t been able to find a track plan I have been happy with. I have not yet decided on which period I would like to model yet as a plan to purchase  the locomotives and rolling stock once I have decided. Most of my current rolling stock are mk2 br blue coaches which are quite old but are still capable to run on both code 100 and code 75 track and may look ok if weathered. Some Locomotives I currently own are older triang br blue locomotives with a few newer Bachman locomotives in br green and coal sector. I plan to do the layout in dcc so I am not sure if the older locomotives can be changed over to dcc or if it’s worth changing them. (The Bachmann locomotives I own are already dcc fitted)  I have attached an image bellow of the dimensions of the layout my initial plan was to have a 4ft radius curve and a station of some sort on the strait section however I haven’t been able to find any sort of track plan that I have been happy with.

some things I want to be included is

at least half of the 4ft radius curve

station that can hold or looks as if it holds 5-7 coaches
most of the points being large or medium radius

 

ideas that could be included 

locomotive shed

sidings (in use or disused)

tramway
 

Any other ideas are appreciated 

 

Not sure if anybody could help and make a track plan or suggest any ideas. As you may see a more effective way to use the space than me. Also any help on signing would be very helpful.

 

One last thing as I have both code 75 and code 100 track is the any ways to utilise both? I have quite a few small peco code 100 points that may be useful for a fiddle yard.

 

Image with layout dimensions below 

 

Thanks

Joe

 

[Sol]

See if you can get this book, I have it & it has many fine layouts

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6437554-mainlines-in-modest-spaces

[crompton 33]

If you want a station that takes 7 coaches plus loco you are looking at 8ft .  Even 5 coaches plus loco you need 6 ft  . And thats not MK3  coaches as these need more space.

[Joeh260]

2 hours ago, crompton 33 said:

If you want a station that takes 7 coaches plus loco you are looking at 8ft .  Even 5 coaches plus loco you need 6 ft  . And thats not MK3  coaches as these need more space.

Thanks for your reply, It is quite long for a station I think, it is one of the main problems I am having. The only idea I had to make the station smaller is if the station is connected to the fiddle yard and only around 3ft of the platforms being visible. That would mean the other 5-6ft would be hidden away in the fiddle yard.

[melmoth]

Hi @Joeh260 , I've got a few questions about your space.

 

1. Does the removable bridge in the corner have to be removable for any particular reason? Do you have to be able to access that corner, or could the baseboards be expanded to fill that space?

 

2. I assume that the fiddle yard need to be removable because of the door. Does the door open into the room, and if so, is it hinged to the left or right?

 

3. How wide is the thin blue gap at the bottom of the plan, and could it also be used?

 

4. I make the outer dimensions of your space 18' x almost 10' 6". Is that correct?

 

5. How wide can the fiddle yard be?

[SteveyDee68]

I suggest taking a look at the General Theory of Minories in the Layout and Track Design forum - you could read from the beginning, but from page 26 it sprang back into life after I requested the station throat drawn on a curve...  Your layout is "handed" the same as mine, with the lines running from right to left into the station - if you take a look at the plans provided, there should be some good ideas to adapt. 

 

Steve S

Edited June 15, 2020 by SteveyDee68
Typos!

[Joeh260]

39 minutes ago, melmoth said:

Hi @Joeh260 , I've got a few questions about your space.

 

1. Does the removable bridge in the corner have to be removable for any particular reason? Do you have to be able to access that corner, or could the baseboards be expanded to fill that space?

 

2. I assume that the fiddle yard need to be removable because of the door. Does the door open into the room, and if so, is it hinged to the left or right?

 

3. How wide is the thin blue gap at the bottom of the plan, and could it also be used?

 

4. I make the outer dimensions of your space 18' x almost 10' 6". Is that correct?

 

5. How wide can the fiddle yard be?

Thanks for your reply

To answer your questions 

1.the removable bridge in the corner is required as easy access To that corner is required at all times

2. The is not an actual opening door it is just the frame

3.the distance between the wall and the fiddle yard is 12inches as the is a radiator in the way

4. Not sure how to answer this one

5. The fiddle yard is only 14inches wide As it needed to be very easily movable 

however the start on the fiddle yard on the bottom right may be widened to 20 inches for the first 2-3ft

[melmoth]

Hi @Joeh260 . Here's a redrawing of your diagram with a 4ft radius curve on it. You might need to double check that I've worked out all the measurements correctly, but it should give some idea of what impact a curve that size will have on what you can do with the rest of your space.

[Joeh260]

11 hours ago, melmoth said:

Hi @Joeh260 . Here's a redrawing of your diagram with a 4ft radius curve on it. You might need to double check that I've worked out all the measurements correctly, but it should give some idea of what impact a curve that size will have on what you can do with the rest of your space.

Thanks for the diagram. It shows the dimensions and size better than mine. Not sure if it will be double track yet but perhaps the station may be better joined up with the fiddle yard. If I halved the 4ft radius curve I could add some points leading into the fiddle yard. So at least 2-3ft of the train will be visible in the station and the rest could be in the fiddle yard. Or a similar type of station on the other side leasing onto the removable bridge.

 

Edited June 16, 2020 by Joeh260
Incorrect spellings

[The Johnster]

I'm going to advise against the removable fiddle yard; this is where your trains will live most of the time and you don't want to waste operating time setting them out at the start and putting them away at the end of each operating session.  Chances are it's only a matter of time before they are left out after a session has to be cut short for some home emergency and somebody unqualified will put 'em away all wrong...  

 

Put your fy board on the top side and the station partly on the curve at the bottom, protecting it with side plates when you take that board down.  Be careful about the right hand end that provides the 4' curve opportunity, as it is usual to reckon that about 2' is the maximum practical distance that you can lean in to perform uncoupling or similar operations , less if the boards are set at more than worktable height.   Don't put anything you might need to get at too close to the. walls here!

 

If you've got some DCC, the choice has already effectively been made for you, as you can't run DCC and DC together on the same layout, or at least I'm not aware that anyone's ever done so successfully.  This means that you have to make some choices about your older stuff.  If you can afford it, replace it with current equivalents and retire it to the display cabinet, but this is going to hit your pocket hard at a time when it's already in pain from the layout building.  There are alternatives, one of which would be to remove the DCC chips and speakers from your modern stock and run the layout DC.  This feels a bit retrograde; there are many advantages to DCC and the irretrievable extra money you've already outlaid on it will be effectively lost.  Or, you could install chips in your older locos.  This may or may not be possible according to how much room there is inside them, and if you can do this yourself, meaning if you are able to solder, it will be cheaper than having it done professionally.  I run DC myself so cannot advise you beyond that.

 

Make sure the boards are level and rigid and that the joins are smooth, with no dips in the middles or peaks at the joins, and lay track carefully, level and smooth to the next piece.  This is especially important around turnouts or crossings and doubly important for the smaller radius turnouts in the fy, another reason I don't like the idea of it having to be taken down all the time.  Trains run into the fy at speed and it looks wrong if you slow them down before the last coach vanishes into the tunnel, so running must be perfect here!

 

Code 100 and code 75 are compatible so long as the railhead height is the same, so if you are going to mix them the 75 will, for smooth running, have to be laid on a sub base of some sort of the precise thickness to bring it's rail head up to the level of the adjoining  code 100 piece.  The appearance will be the main problem apart from that, and it will be better to hide the 100 as much as you can; use it for the fy.  There is no such thing as too much space in your fy, so try to make the board as wide as you can, and leave about an inch clear between the roads, which will look like wasting width until you need to get your hand or fingers down in there between stock without derailing it for whatever reason.  Try and avoid insulfrog curved turnouts if you can, especially in positions where short wheelbased 4 wheeled locos or power bogies are going to traverse them.  This is a pity because the smaller setrack ones which are only available in insulfrog form are good space savers so long as all your stock is RTR.

[Joeh260]

On 16/06/2020 at 19:38, The Johnster said:

I'm going to advise against the removable fiddle yard; this is where your trains will live most of the time and you don't want to waste operating time setting them out at the start and putting them away at the end of each operating session.  Chances are it's only a matter of time before they are left out after a session has to be cut short for some home emergency and somebody unqualified will put 'em away all wrong...  

 

Put your fy board on the top side and the station partly on the curve at the bottom, protecting it with side plates when you take that board down.  Be careful about the right hand end that provides the 4' curve opportunity, as it is usual to reckon that about 2' is the maximum practical distance that you can lean in to perform uncoupling or similar operations , less if the boards are set at more than worktable height.   Don't put anything you might need to get at too close to the. walls here!

 

If you've got some DCC, the choice has already effectively been made for you, as you can't run DCC and DC together on the same layout, or at least I'm not aware that anyone's ever done so successfully.  This means that you have to make some choices about your older stuff.  If you can afford it, replace it with current equivalents and retire it to the display cabinet, but this is going to hit your pocket hard at a time when it's already in pain from the layout building.  There are alternatives, one of which would be to remove the DCC chips and speakers from your modern stock and run the layout DC.  This feels a bit retrograde; there are many advantages to DCC and the irretrievable extra money you've already outlaid on it will be effectively lost.  Or, you could install chips in your older locos.  This may or may not be possible according to how much room there is inside them, and if you can do this yourself, meaning if you are able to solder, it will be cheaper than having it done professionally.  I run DC myself so cannot advise you beyond that.

 

Make sure the boards are level and rigid and that the joins are smooth, with no dips in the middles or peaks at the joins, and lay track carefully, level and smooth to the next piece.  This is especially important around turnouts or crossings and doubly important for the smaller radius turnouts in the fy, another reason I don't like the idea of it having to be taken down all the time.  Trains run into the fy at speed and it looks wrong if you slow them down before the last coach vanishes into the tunnel, so running must be perfect here!

 

Code 100 and code 75 are compatible so long as the railhead height is the same, so if you are going to mix them the 75 will, for smooth running, have to be laid on a sub base of some sort of the precise thickness to bring it's rail head up to the level of the adjoining  code 100 piece.  The appearance will be the main problem apart from that, and it will be better to hide the 100 as much as you can; use it for the fy.  There is no such thing as too much space in your fy, so try to make the board as wide as you can, and leave about an inch clear between the roads, which will look like wasting width until you need to get your hand or fingers down in there between stock without derailing it for whatever reason.  Try and avoid insulfrog curved turnouts if you can, especially in positions where short wheelbased 4 wheeled locos or power bogies are going to traverse them.  This is a pity because the smaller setrack ones which are only available in insulfrog form are good space savers so long as all your stock is RTR.

Thanks for the reply

Unfortunately the fiddle yard Has to be removable as the main radiator is there and the room already gets very warm Due to all the pipes that lead to the other radiators throughout the house. Also that area has other uses at the moment.

I think I’ll be better just put the older stock away for now as I have already spent quite a bit of money on dcc locomotives.

Regarding the code 75 and 100 track I think I’ll probably be better off just using the code 100 for the fiddle yard and the code 75 for the scenic areas.

[DCB]

First Triang won't run on code 75, most will run on PECO code 100.  PECO has more clearance due to clever rail fixings which stop flanges hitting the chairs.  Triang is a doddle to convert to DCC. insulate both brushes with an additional bit of sleeving and job done.  Triang /Hornby Tender drives and Power bogies are a lot of work to convert and H/D Wrenn vary from a doddle with the open frame motor which just needs an extra sleeve to a nightmare where the brushes pass through the chassis.

The oldest Metal wheel Triang locos had non see through Mazak wheels which can easily be turned down to run on code 100, or 75 for that matter

They then went to hard, very hard, iron like non see through wheels which really can't be tuned down and are un usable, then they went to separate tyres for Steam locos and softer wheels which can be turned for Power Bogies. These will run through PECO code 100 but you may need to pop the wheels off and put washers behind to get the back to back right for Code 100 track.

If you can get them Markits did wheels and axles to convert the Triang  locos to Romford wheels.  Thing is once done they last forever.  They pull well if weighted and are repairable using standardised components, and the metal doesn't fatigue. Unlike current Chinese production.  The Triang A1A and C0 C0 diesel chassis look awful with their fixed dummy centre wheels

 

The Layout is a typical example of cart before horse in designing an unusual shape baseboard and trying to fit a layout in. 

The removable FY can work if it's on wheels and can be moved without removing the stock.  If it just has to come out  for access to a radiator or a door a traverser on its own wheels could work brilliantly.  Having to remove the stock before moving it isn't going to work modern RTR does not like being maulered, Bits break off, Ventilators, hand rails, steps and dropping them can be terminal. .  Better to put the passenger station  there if it has to be lifted. There is no reason the lift outs can't be scenic, see my doodle  for wheeled Traverser which will take 8 maybe 9 coach trains.   Green line could be viaduct or station platforms, or both, see Stroud Glos GWR.   If that concept works then we just need a steer into what operations you are after.

 

Edited June 19, 2020 by DavidCBroad
Wrong Doodle

[The Johnster]

2 hours ago, Joeh260 said:

Thanks for the reply

Unfortunately the fiddle yard Has to be removable as the main radiator is there and the room already gets very warm Due to all the pipes that lead to the other radiators throughout the house. Also that area has other uses at the moment.

I think I’ll be better just put the older stock away for now as I have already spent quite a bit of money on dcc locomotives.

Regarding the code 75 and 100 track I think I’ll probably be better off just using the code 100 for the fiddle yard and the code 75 for the scenic areas.

If the room's that warm from the pipes, turn the rad off, or reflect the heat away from the layout by putting aluminium cooking foil on the underside of the baseboards.  Code 75 looks better but is more expensive, so keeping it for the scenic areas and using code 100 in the fy makes good sense.  I'm in agreement with David that having to removed stock from your fy will very rapidly become a chore, but his wheeled fy is an option I hadn't considered.  It needs a smooth floor and I would use proper  wheels rather than castors.

[Joeh260]

On 19/06/2020 at 12:33, DavidCBroad said:

First Triang won't run on code 75, most will run on PECO code 100.  PECO has more clearance due to clever rail fixings which stop flanges hitting the chairs.  Triang is a doddle to convert to DCC. insulate both brushes with an additional bit of sleeving and job done.  Triang /Hornby Tender drives and Power bogies are a lot of work to convert and H/D Wrenn vary from a doddle with the open frame motor which just needs an extra sleeve to a nightmare where the brushes pass through the chassis.

The oldest Metal wheel Triang locos had non see through Mazak wheels which can easily be turned down to run on code 100, or 75 for that matter

They then went to hard, very hard, iron like non see through wheels which really can't be tuned down and are un usable, then they went to separate tyres for Steam locos and softer wheels which can be turned for Power Bogies. These will run through PECO code 100 but you may need to pop the wheels off and put washers behind to get the back to back right for Code 100 track.

If you can get them Markits did wheels and axles to convert the Triang  locos to Romford wheels.  Thing is once done they last forever.  They pull well if weighted and are repairable using standardised components, and the metal doesn't fatigue. Unlike current Chinese production.  The Triang A1A and C0 C0 diesel chassis look awful with their fixed dummy centre wheels

 

The Layout is a typical example of cart before horse in designing an unusual shape baseboard and trying to fit a layout in. 

The removable FY can work if it's on wheels and can be moved without removing the stock.  If it just has to come out  for access to a radiator or a door a traverser on its own wheels could work brilliantly.  Having to remove the stock before moving it isn't going to work modern RTR does not like being maulered, Bits break off, Ventilators, hand rails, steps and dropping them can be terminal. .  Better to put the passenger station  there if it has to be lifted. There is no reason the lift outs can't be scenic, see my doodle  for wheeled Traverser which will take 8 maybe 9 coach trains.   Green line could be viaduct or station platforms, or both, see Stroud Glos GWR.   If that concept works then we just need a steer into what operations you are after.

 

Thanks for the reply, I think I am probably best putting the older locomotives away for now as it sounds like a lot of work to change them from Dc to Dcc. I had considered the fiddle yard on wheels to move it easily however the floor is not level at all, it was intended to be a utility room when the house was Purchased But as the room have never been renovated the floor is inches higher on one side compared to the other so having the fiddle yard on wheels isn’t really an option at the moment.

[Joeh260]

On 19/06/2020 at 13:53, The Johnster said:

If the room's that warm from the pipes, turn the rad off, or reflect the heat away from the layout by putting aluminium cooking foil on the underside of the baseboards.  Code 75 looks better but is more expensive, so keeping it for the scenic areas and using code 100 in the fy makes good sense.  I'm in agreement with David that having to removed stock from your fy will very rapidly become a chore, but his wheeled fy is an option I hadn't considered.  It needs a smooth floor and I would use proper  wheels rather than castors.

Unfortunately actual room is filled with pipes that run a few inches from the floor. The boiler and meter are also both in the room meaning some pipes are only centimetres away from the baceboards. The layout isn’t really in the ideal room but it’s this room or no layout at all. Although it will be rather annoying I think the way I will have to store most of the stock is by running it all onto the permanent boards when the layout is not in use and the fiddle yard is put away.

Edited June 21, 2020 by Joeh260
Incorrect spelling

[Butler Henderson]

On the issue of older Locos they will in any case also have problems with Code 100 points; whilst it use to be the case Peco points had adequate clearance, recent retoolings have narrowed gaps as I found out trying to run a 1980s Hornby Rocket through them. Could the fiddle yard be made as a trolley so it can be easily moved out of the way with the stock still on it. 

[Joeh260]

41 minutes ago, Butler Henderson said:

On the issue of older Locos they will in any case also have problems with Code 100 points; whilst it use to be the case Peco points had adequate clearance, recent retoolings have narrowed gaps as I found out trying to run a 1980s Hornby Rocket through them. Could the fiddle yard be made as a trolley so it can be easily moved out of the way with the stock still on it. 

Unfortunately it will be extremely difficult to put wheels on the fiddle yard and actually roll it around with stock on as the floor is very uneven. It is possible to put wheels on the fiddle yard however the legs will be higher on one end compared to the other. I fear if I tried to move it with rolling stock it may roll off the fiddle yard or the fiddle yard may topple with the uneven floor. Regarding running older stock on new track, I have ran various 1970s locomotives on peco and Hornby track and they work remarkably well on them and I have had no issues with points on other layouts I have tested them on. I haven’t tried them on code 75 but from what I have been told here and by others, the flanges are too large and sit on the chairs.

[Butler Henderson]

Could it be made to rotate - plenty of examples of fiddle yards that go through 180 degrees and you only need say half that. Yes 1970s locos will go through Code 100 Peco if the points are of the 1970s/1980s design but probably will not go through any which have been retooled - my Rocket took offence to a single slip .

[The Johnster]

I've run ancient 1960s Triang wheels successfully on current code 100 Peco Streamline, including turnouts, a couple of shorty GW clerestories which were re-wheeled afterwards anyway.  Recently acquired a Dock Authority shunter which gibbed at both Streamline and Setrack flangeways but this turned out to be a back to back issue easily solved by a bit of gratuitous brutality with an old screwdriver.  It now runs faultlessly, and manages my insulfrogs effortlessly.  Code 75 is another story, I reckon.  Any 'modern' stock should run ok on it, but I'd be wary of anything pre-90s, and doubt that 80s Lima will manage,  Rolling stock wheels can be easily enough replaced, except Hornby 'design clever' period, but those are recent enough to be ok anyway, but locos may be more difficult to convert to the required standard.  Turning the flanges down on a lathe if you have one or something that can be used as one such as a minidrill in a vice might be feasible, but might need a lot of cleaning up to achieve smooth running.  I'd be reluctant to turn them down in the chassis as filings will get everywhere!

[DCB]

As @The Johnster  says a lot of  1960s stock will run on most Peco Code 100 both Insulfrog and Electrofrog.   We had some  Peco 2ft Electro Frog points 10 years ago without metal springs or contact tags for the blades which were useless and had to be binned.  They may well have been the tight flange way type.

Subsequently we have always managed to get ones with springs and tags, whether they were old stock or whether they changed back I don't know.  Most 1950s "Split wheel" Triang runs non Peco code 100 if you space the back to back out with a small washer, 8 BA I believe. but the frames sometimes snap trying to get axles out.  a coupe of turns nof thick cotton soaked in superglue might work better. Pin points with steel axles are usually fine but the stock which won't run on Peco Code 100 on DC are the Hornby "Silver seal" square axle metal rim wheels which are too tight back to back.  They are moulded as one lump and short on some points even on DC I cut some in half. sleeved the axles but the success rate was poor and most wobbled. 

There are some super huge Dock Shunter wheels which are so hard they wear files and lathe tools away,  Filing the flanges with them on the loco usually results in the insulated wheel coming loose on the bush and sometimes the non insulated one's splines rip out as well, I don't mount the wheels on their axles in a drill or lathe chuck any more, I put a tight fitting bolt though and clamp the wheels with a couple of nuts and washers against the faces of the wheels.

[Joeh260]

1 hour ago, Butler Henderson said:

Could it be made to rotate - plenty of examples of fiddle yards that go through 180 degrees and you only need say half that. Yes 1970s locos will go through Code 100 Peco if the points are of the 1970s/1980s design but probably will not go through any which have been retooled - my Rocket took offence to a single slip .

It may be a possibility that it could rotate but I am not sure how I would do it. I looked at ways of doing the wheels on the fiddle yard and how I would be able to store it whilst not in use. When not operational it would have some sort of adjustable legs to make sure it sits flat and not on a incline. Even then it will probably be in the way if I wanted to work on the layout as it would need to be moved to allow access to the permanent baceboards if it was not in its operational position. 

[Butler Henderson]

Different thought - what if the fiddle yard slid next to the left hand board; that end of it would be held firmly by whatever mechanism is used  - would wheels on the fair end still be problematic. 

A complete alternative would be have the layout as multi level with the fiddle yard below so the removable section can just be a scenic board.

[Joeh260]

1 hour ago, Butler Henderson said:

Different thought - what if the fiddle yard slid next to the left hand board; that end of it would be held firmly by whatever mechanism is used  - would wheels on the fair end still be problematic. 

A complete alternative would be have the layout as multi level with the fiddle yard below so the removable section can just be a scenic board.

More than likely the wheels may be a problem. A second level may be possible underneath the layout but it will  only be able have one entrance into it and would have to enter the lower level from the removable board (removal fiddle yard) it would need to go around 12-3 inches lower so not sure if the incline would be too steep. Don’t think a helix is an option as the isn’t enough room and they look rather expensive.

[Butler Henderson]

You can reduced the length needed for an incline down by inclining up the surface level track. A foot is possibly a bit too much to achieve  but if say you reduced the clearance to 8" then a 1 in 30 gradient then would need to be a 20ft long but if the surface level tracks rose pro rata only 10ft and should therefore allow for it to be double ended.

[Grovenor]

Perhaps the way to deal with the removable fiddle yard is to fix it to sky (ceiling) hooks so it can be raised up above head height when out of use. Same priciple as old style clothes airer and use some sash window weights as counterbalance.