Jump to content

Recommended Posts

HI Everyone,

 

I'm new to this after many years of promising myself I'd do it! I have an 8x4 board with a small section to the left about 600 x 300 (sorry for mixing imperial and metric). I am planning the layout to be era 3-4 and a non specific suburban area. I'm after a layout that

has some playability and also a good basis for creative modelling. I'd love peoples opinions on this plan (Be Gentle! I'm new!). I've used R2 and R4 curves with some flexi track to fit. To the right is a small incline into a tunnel which then declines out of the tunnell at the back of the board (always wanted a tunnel so this is a has to be). Plan done in AnyRail 6.

 

Cheers

Capture.JPG

Edited by Newbie2020
missed a bit off!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Try thinking through how you intend to operate the layout to judge whether it provides you with what you are looking for. 

 

My main comment is that the sidings to the left of your image are all rather short - the usable length is less than the length of the track, as I'm assuming you will add buffer stops and you need about three to six inches at the heel end of the point to allow the adjacent sidings to be used.  Of the six sidings, the lower ones don't look as though they will accommodate more than a small tank locomotive or maybe a couple of private owner wagons but not both at the same time.  I'd therefore be tempted to get rid of the curved point and the lower of these sidings, so that you create a single longer siding that can accommodate a train that is perhaps three feet long (ie a locomotive and three bogie coaches).

 

The loop at the station is also very short.  Again, you need to measure the distance between the heel end of the two points and subtract around six to 12 inches to provide the necessary clearances for a run round manoeuvre and you'll find that you are not able to run round more that a single coach.  If you're looking to use the loop as a passing loop, then you'll be restricted to very short trains.  The stationary train when two pass will probably have to a rail-car or one coach DMU in more modern times since I doubt you'll be able to accommodate a locomotive and coach unless it's a tank locomotive and a four or six wheel coach.  I'd be tempted to try and move the point-work for the loop onto the curve if possible. 

 

As for the tunnel, I'd be inclined to keep the track through the tunnel level and ensure that you have access to whatever derails in the tunnel.  I'm assuming that you have access to all sides: it's difficult to stretch more than two feet to sort a derailment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All good points, Thankyou. I've had a quick play with it and come up with version 3! (many more to come I'm sure!). The sidings to the left are a little short but I'm looking at ways to rearrange the furniture in the garage to allow more space here.

Layout3.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

The extra board you've shown top left must be substantially bigger than 600 x 300 (2' x 1' as near as dammit)  to fit in the trackwork you've shown there.  The top 4 sidings would fill a space that size .....  I reckon it's more like 3' x 18"?

 

Assuming I'm right, there are definitely better ways of arranging those sidings.  And I think for play value you need more sidings in the centre, though that would mean you will need to be even more creative with your non-railway modelling to make it look good.

 

A completely different approach would be a terminus station reaching into that extra space and a return loop - bare bones like this ........

 

1004019481_Newbiejpg.jpg.72639b5b06eccc5c1fabdce2ee685249.jpg 

I've taken your 300 x 200 for the top left space, more would be a bonus.  The return loop is R2 and the curve at the right hand end R3.  Needs development, some way of holding a train somewhere so it doesn't come straight back would be really good, but might have possibilities.

 

All the best, Chris

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Dungrange’s points and would add one or two.  The outer curves come very close to the baseboard edge which means that if it is an open edge any derailments will mean a drop to the floor, but if it is butted against a wall, the end overthrow of coaches will hit the wall.   The scissors diamond crossover might be better as two sets of crossover turnouts; you have room and for the scissors arrangement to work needs extremely accurate precision tracklaying, which is tbh a big ask for a newbie.  Setrack curves, even no.4, are awkward on curves as the track assumes a corksrew form with the inside rail being steeper than the outside, giving your locos problems with grip and pickup just where they need it most!

 

Not all is lost by any means, but a rethink is perhaps not a bad idea.  Could we know more about the railway room and how the layout fits into it?  Access to all parts of the board is vital, and if any of the sides butt up to a wall the layout as it’s drawn will give problems, perhaps solvable with an operating well in the middle.  
 

I‘d suggest:-

 

.Leave the incline until the next layout. 
 

.Ditch the scissors and replace it with conventional crossovers. 
 

.Bring the outer curves in from the ends about 2” each.  This means the inner station loop is even shorter, and it’s already too short to be of much use, so...

 

.Repurpose it. Y points at each end replacing  the curved pieces allows goods  sidings in each direction formed of no.1 curves that can act as headshunts for each other.  
 

.You can now dispense with the other ‘inside the circuit’ sidings unless you have a specific purpose in mind for them. 
 

.Simplify the ‘add on’ board sidings.  If you reduce them to two of decent length, you might squeeze a two road island platform terminus capable of 2 57’ coaches and a small tank loco.  A third road as a loco stabling point with watering facilities, which can be quite short, will enable a loco to attach to the rear of trains arrive in one of the platforms to take it back out for the return working; the original loco retires to the stabling point to do the same to the next one. 
 

Welcome to the madness, I mean hobby, sorry.  It will take over your life completely, and you will soon be one of us.  One of us, one of us...

 

Let us know how you are getting on, ask any questions because the only daft ones are the ones you didn’t ask; someone here will know the answer, and, most importantly, HAVE FUN!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Chimer said:

Needs development, some way of holding a train somewhere so it doesn't come straight back would be really good, but might have possibilities.

 

For example (now complete with tunnel, open back for emergency access) ...

 

958299861_Newbiejpg.jpg.41ce7b0c619d9e4847be7032e3370fa2.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were me I would go multi level. I'd put a terminus on a sweeping curve on the left hand side of the larger board, a MPD/carriage sidings/parcels depot on the smaller board. I'd do a long sweep downwards from the terminus along the top side and RHS of the main board and join it to a continuous run with a return loop at the lower level. 

The two "complex" bits for a beginner would be the gradient (there's a foam pre-formed gradient kit to zirt thst out) and secondly wiring the return loop. For that I'd seek advice on this forum. My point being that neither problem is insurmountable.

Tunnels: yep the track could dart into one under the station. 

Sorry I can't think offer a sketch - I've not currently gothe access to a scanner.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! so much to think about ! Return loop had actually not even entered my thinking!

 

So step one - measure properly! Then step two - watch a YouTube on how to set up a baseboard accurately in AnyRail 6!

 

Version 4 Coming soon!

 

Clive

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Johnster said:

I have to agree with Dungrange’s points and would add one or two.  The outer curves come very close to the baseboard edge which means that if it is an open edge any derailments will mean a drop to the floor, but if it is butted against a wall, the end overthrow of coaches will hit the wall.   The scissors diamond crossover might be better as two sets of crossover turnouts; you have room and for the scissors arrangement to work needs extremely accurate precision tracklaying, which is tbh a big ask for a newbie.  Setrack curves, even no.4, are awkward on curves as the track assumes a corksrew form with the inside rail being steeper than the outside, giving your locos problems with grip and pickup just where they need it most!

 

Not all is lost by any means, but a rethink is perhaps not a bad idea.  Could we know more about the railway room and how the layout fits into it?  Access to all parts of the board is vital, and if any of the sides butt up to a wall the layout as it’s drawn will give problems, perhaps solvable with an operating well in the middle.  
 

I‘d suggest:-

 

.Leave the incline until the next layout. 
 

.Ditch the scissors and replace it with conventional crossovers. 
 

.Bring the outer curves in from the ends about 2” each.  This means the inner station loop is even shorter, and it’s already too short to be of much use, so...

 

.Repurpose it. Y points at each end replacing  the curved pieces allows goods  sidings in each direction formed of no.1 curves that can act as headshunts for each other.  
 

.You can now dispense with the other ‘inside the circuit’ sidings unless you have a specific purpose in mind for them. 
 

.Simplify the ‘add on’ board sidings.  If you reduce them to two of decent length, you might squeeze a two road island platform terminus capable of 2 57’ coaches and a small tank loco.  A third road as a loco stabling point with watering facilities, which can be quite short, will enable a loco to attach to the rear of trains arrive in one of the platforms to take it back out for the return working; the original loco retires to the stabling point to do the same to the next one. 
 

Welcome to the madness, I mean hobby, sorry.  It will take over your life completely, and you will soon be one of us.  One of us, one of us...

 

Let us know how you are getting on, ask any questions because the only daft ones are the ones you didn’t ask; someone here will know the answer, and, most importantly, HAVE FUN!!!

Can you clarify the difference between a scissors crossing and conventional crossovers?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Newbie2020 said:

Can you clarify the difference between a scissors crossing and conventional crossovers?

 

A scissors crossover is what you have drawn, which effectively comprises four points and a diamond crossing.  However, much more common would be a crossover made up of just two points and these can either form a facing crossover or a trailing crossover depending on whether you are using left hand or right hand points.  Left hand points will give you a trailing crossover and right hand points will give you a facing crossover in the context of a double track line, where trains drive on the left.  In your period, trailing crossovers would be far more common.  Effectively, a scissors crossover is a trailing crossover overlaid on a facing crossover.

 

What @The Johnster is suggesting is that you replace the scissors crossover with a facing crossover followed by a trailing crossover.  There are a number of advantages to this approach.  Firstly, you still need the same four points, but you no longer need the diamond crossing, so it reduces the cost.  Secondly, although two separate crossovers will use up more length, it would allow you to move the two parallel tracks closer together, which helps if your curves are rather close to the baseboard edge.  It is also likely to be more prototypical, as the real railway tended to only install scissors crossings where they were essential due to space constraints.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Newbie2020 said:

The room is my garage. She who must be obeyed has given me the space shown!

Railway room.JPG

 

Hmm. The problem you will face is accessing tracks next to the garage wall. 

Have a think about an operating well in the main board. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Newbie2020 said:

The room is my garage. She who must be obeyed has given me the space shown!

Railway room.JPG

 

Okay, your plan is not ideal for the space available, as the wall along one edge means that there is an area of your track plan where you will not be able to reach.  In general, don't plan to be able to stretch more than two foot from the baseboard edge, although if you're reasonably tall or the layout is set quite low, then you can probably stretch about 2' 6" (750 mm) with relative ease, but three foot would be an absolute maximum if you're both tall and the layout is low.  That means that there is an area at least two foot by one foot, but potentially as big as four foot by two foot that you simply won't be able to reach if something derails (and it will).  On your first plan you have a scissors crossover and the access to your two sidings in that area.  I think you'll therefore need to consider some form of central operating well, or at least an access hole that's around 18" square into which you can gain access.

 

If you go with @Chimer's suggestion of a return loop (which I quite like, although it doesn't give you a continuous run if that is important to you), then you'd create the access hole in the centre of the return loops.  Unfortunately, if this becomes the operating well, then your tunnel will be behind you, which may not be what you are looking for.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AndyB said:

 

Hmm. The problem you will face is accessing tracks next to the garage wall. 

Have a think about an operating well in the main board. 

 

That is a thought, especially as the modelling develops.  How big would you suggest?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Newbie2020 said:

 

That is a thought, especially as the modelling develops.  How big would you suggest?

 That depends how big you are ;-)

(Although it may be wise to allow a little 'growing room'....)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Newbie2020 said:

 

That is a thought, especially as the modelling develops.  How big would you suggest?

 

I'd try and get 2'. 

Can I ask - is OO a given.  Or might you consider n gauge? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Newbie2020 said:

That is a thought, especially as the modelling develops.  How big would you suggest?

 

The minimum size of the operating well, will depend on how big you are.  I suggested 18" square above as that's the minimum space that I could squeeze into, but I'd probably prefer something closer to 22" square.  However, if you're quite large then you need to design the operating well around you.  Possibly best to measure across your shoulder blades to give you a figure to work with.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

If you go with @Chimer's suggestion of a return loop (which I quite like, although it doesn't give you a continuous run if that is important to you), then you'd create the access hole in the centre of the return loops.  Unfortunately, if this becomes the operating well, then your tunnel will be behind you, which may not be what you are looking for.

 

Spookily, I went on to version 3 which did include a continuous run.  Didn't bother to post, but I will if anyone's interested ..... 2 foot diameter is probably enough for an access manhole, I don't believe you can put a sensible operating well inside an 8' x 4'.  Access to a child may be a bonus in case of emergencies ....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chimer said:

 

Spookily, I went on to version 3 which did include a continuous run.  Didn't bother to post, but I will if anyone's interested ..... 2 foot diameter is probably enough for an access manhole, I don't believe you can put a sensible operating well inside an 8' x 4'.  Access to a child may be a bonus in case of emergencies ....

 

Yes i'd love to see your ideas, I 'm sort of agreeing with you on the operating well. I'd need 22-24 inch square which would remove a large area from the board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AndyB said:

Could it be moved away from the wall for operating sessions and "parked" against the wall when not in use? That way you'd have access on all sides.

 

Not really, there's other stuff along the opposite wall that's restricting me.

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.