Fill my baseboard with track!

[fffrank]

After much consulting of every track layout book I can lay my hands on, I am still struggling to put pen to paper. I've spent hours and hours pouring over the inspiring layouts here. On the basis that the first step is the hardest, and I'm struggling to take it, so hoping someone can give me the push/kick up the backside I need.

 

Baseboard plan attached, with a few ideas sketched out. You can see it hugs all 4 walls of my garden studio (it's a log cabin, albeit fully insulated/electrified/fibre broadband and all). It's ~2.7mx1.4m, and has to double as a bit of a more general workshop - so the layout will be on 300mm deep shelves above cupboards/workbench.

 

It's the actual details of the trackplan I'm struggling with, but here's what I do know:

 

1. I'm now sold on N gauge. DCC, but not bothered with sound. 

 

2. This is fun. I love a Gresley A4. I like a shunter. I grew up on Oxford, and have family in Sussex, and in the North East. All 3 are interesting in their own ways, but I'm not obsessive about the mise en scene. But definitely steam - although unsure whether Big 4 or early BR is better (or even whether I mind that much!)

 

3. I want to be able to switch it on, and let it run. Track on all 4 sides, with a hinged/lifting section for the (outward-opening) door. 

 

4. I want plenty of scenery, at the expense of any kind of fiddle yard. I've drafted a couple of hidden sidings in the scenic section, and think that will be sufficient. Running a timetable isn't that interesting to me.

 

5. Things I'm most looking forward to: (a) building all my MERG kits, and learning how to wire electrofrog points and all that jazz; (b) building the scenery (I have plans to use XPS foam to create land contours).

 

6. I don't have a huge amount of time on my hands, but have no plans to move house. If it takes me a decade to build this, not a problem (and I've split the benchwork into relatively manageable chunks anyway).

 

7. I'm a 100% Mac user, and it appears that there is no software that I can use to plan this in any kind of systematic way (Wine doesn't work on MacOS Catalina, so I can't use Scarm or similar).

 

All and indeed any suggestions gratefully received! 

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2020 by fffrank

[Kris]

Mac track planning software = RailModeller https://www.railmodeller.com/home-railmodeller.html

 

Track plan wise, a looped figure of 8 might work for you.

[fffrank]

I've been reading David Wright's "Modelling Branch Lines", which is where I've taken a few of the names of places from. Pics attached.

 

 

[ITG]

I returned to OO after a multi-year gap, and a trap I fell into in my first layout, was a mismatch between the amount of locos and rolling stock I had gathered, and the amount of track space to ‘store’ them, be that either platform roads, goods/carriage sidings or (hidden) storage sidings. And then still have room for the layout to ‘breathe’. And leave head room as you acquire more stock.

Hence, although you said “I want plenty of scenery, at the expense of any kind of fiddle yard. I've drafted a couple of hidden sidings in the scenic section, and think that will be sufficient”  you may need more than you think. Best to have under-utilised space (for now) than have to squeeze in extra sidings etc later.

[Kris]

Here is a basic outline. There should be a station at the top. The yellow is the goods yard. At the bottom is the fiddle yard. There are gradients involved to make this work. The bottom most lines would be higher than the fiddle yard allowing these to be scenic in some way (or hidden in others). 

 

If possible I would suggest squeezing an extra 10cm on the width on the boards at the top and the right to make for a larger goods yard. 

 

[Dungrange]

2 hours ago, ITG said:

I returned to OO after a multi-year gap, and a trap I fell into in my first layout, was a mismatch between the amount of locos and rolling stock I had gathered, and the amount of track space to ‘store’ them, be that either platform roads, goods/carriage sidings or (hidden) storage sidings. And then still have room for the layout to ‘breathe’. And leave head room as you acquire more stock.

Hence, although you said “I want plenty of scenery, at the expense of any kind of fiddle yard. I've drafted a couple of hidden sidings in the scenic section, and think that will be sufficient”  you may need more than you think. Best to have under-utilised space (for now) than have to squeeze in extra sidings etc later.

 

I'll second that.  The attic layout that I'm building at the moment will have a fiddle yard that will comprise about 12 - 15 loops.  I can either fit in 12 'full length' loops along the back wall or by accepting some shorter loops, I can fit a couple of extra loops in, which is my current plan (ie not all trains need to be circa 10' long).  However, when thinking about my storage requirements in detail, I've realised that I already have too much stock.  To run everything that I own, some trains will have to be removed, packed away and something else put on the layout instead.  I don't think I'm alone.

 

Looking at the initial sketch in the first post, it would appear that the proposed layout wouldn't be capable of accommodating more than about four trains: one in the industrial area, one sitting at the halt, one in the fiddle yard loop and the other circulating the continuous run.  I'd therefore be looking to increase the fiddle yard provision as well as looking to add loops and sidings elsewhere, especially when it sounds as though you will be tempted to buy and run what you like.

[Chimer]

Your title is "Fill my baseboard with track" and Kris has certainly done that with his folded eight.  But your original sketch suggests you actually want something giving your trains a lot more room to breathe.  The book extracts show rural scenes, but if you do love an A4, and want it to look half-way right, a single track rural branchline isn't going to do it.  You want to switch it on, and let it run.  Then what?  Do you want to shunt trucks around a goods yard, reform long passenger services, change engines - or just watch a couple of trains go round and round until you switch off again?

 

You've given us quite a lot of space to play with (I think - my brain doesn't work at 2mm/ft, so I'm actually thinking as if this is 15' x 9' and 2' deep all round, in OO) but  not a lot of clues, really.  

 

Best of luck!

[KingEdwardII]

6 hours ago, fffrank said:

 

...I'm a 100% Mac user, and it appears that there is no software that I can use to plan this in any kind of systematic way...

fffrank,

 

I too am a dedicated Mac user and also a bit of a skinflint, so I use XTrackCAD for layout planning, which is free to download and install:

 

http://xtrkcad-fork.sourceforge.net/Wikka/DownloadInstall

 

It also supports Windows & Linux.

 

It is a bit quirky and takes a bit of getting used to, but for my OO gauge layout, I have found it very useful. It lets you play around with your track plan and make adjustments quite rapidly. I have also been able to use the plan to actually lay the track, by printing out my "final" plan at 1:1 and sticking down the printouts on my baseboards.

 

Mike.

[fffrank]

13 hours ago, Chimer said:

Your title is "Fill my baseboard with track" and Kris has certainly done that with his folded eight.  But your original sketch suggests you actually want something giving your trains a lot more room to breathe.  The book extracts show rural scenes, but if you do love an A4, and want it to look half-way right, a single track rural branchline isn't going to do it.  You want to switch it on, and let it run.  Then what?  Do you want to shunt trucks around a goods yard, reform long passenger services, change engines - or just watch a couple of trains go round and round until you switch off again?

 

You've given us quite a lot of space to play with (I think - my brain doesn't work at 2mm/ft, so I'm actually thinking as if this is 15' x 9' and 2' deep all round, in OO) but  not a lot of clues, really.  

 

Best of luck!

The halfway right bit isn’t too much of a concern. But I take the point! I do want to create that sense of scenery with some trains running in it, rather than trains with some bits of scenery (if that makes sense). 
 

More research last night. I’m thinking of a model very loosely based on NER branch lines, between Bishop Auckland and Durham. As well as small branch line traffic, and a colliery service (which were numerous), that would allow me to include some of the east coast main line, with the occasional glimpse of the Mallard!

Edited December 9, 2020 by fffrank

[DCB]

NER is a good choice, most of their routes were well constructed, even branches, with axle loads around 20 tons, unlike many (G)WR lines so Pacifics were more likely to appear than on a GWR for instance branch.

Most folk end up with more stock than they can store on the layout.  If you have sensible couplings, N gauge, Kadee, or in OO Peco / HD than you can easily hoik an individual vehicle off the track and stick it on a shelf, OO tension locks make this a lot more awkward, but I can't see any reason to pack stuff away every time.  My locos often rotate between display cabinet and layout.

However many people use their station to store trains.  Down Flying Scotchman waits in platform 2 as the KX Aberdeen sleeper sits in P3 as a pickup freight runs down the down main.   Its not even as realistic as Tomas the tank.  Coaches in carriage sidings and wagons in sidings look good but not complete trans queued up.

Maybe a simple station, a couple or three platforms, no separate  through lines etc would help the interest while allowing continuous running as you fiddle with other stuff.   My own concept for the unfinished/ abandoned loft layout, is a through station, the last before a terminus, with the terminus's loco depot and a goods marshalling  yard, the carriage sidings are off scene the opposite end to the suposed station.   It makes operating interesting as passenger trains appear as ECS with a tank, the train loco goes off shed, reappears with its train, the tank reappears with more ECS followed by the loco from the previous train heading on shed.  I would need a couple or three pilots and several main line locos, and double the number of trains.   It wasn't that uncommon.

Equally it is amazing how many trains some ordinary two platform stations handled, both through, stopping and terminating.   If you downsize the passenger station then the area for scenery increases,  But stations also have scenery, rivers under, roads over, some in cuttings, some on Viaducts, almost none on a flat expanse of ply wood....

[Pete the Elaner]

2 hours ago, fffrank said:

The halfway right bit isn’t too much of a concern. But I take the point! I do want to create that sense of scenery with some trains running in it, rather than trains with some bits of scenery (if that makes sense). 
 

More research last night. I’m thinking of a model very loosely based on NER branch lines, between Bishop Auckland and Durham. As well as small branch line traffic, and a colliery service (which were numerous), that would allow me to include some of the east coast main line, with the occasional glimpse of the Mallard!

 

Yes, that completely makes sense. They are two very different approaches determined only by personal preference.

 

The trains with bits of scenery is based around fitting on what you want. I have seen stations & freight sidings in the middle of layouts with no way to get to them & no space for unloading.

 

The scenery approach is to consider that the railway is there to move freight & people. Most goods moves onwards by road, so you need road access. Stations are often surrounded by shops & houses. Some may seem to be in the middle of nowhere, but these would be the closes the railway got to the village, not be half a mile along the line from a settlement.

Railways take up lots of space, which can make layouts look compressed. If you can reduce this illusion, you will have something which looks more realistic.

[arv]

Hi I have used RailModeller Pro on my Mac for several years to design my double garage sized layout. It contains all the turnouts and allows free radius flexi-track to be drawn as well. I find it really good and worth the small outlay.

I also drew the dilic board for the solenoid points using it,...

https://apps.apple.com/au/app/railmodeller-pro/id952380304?mt=12

There is a light version so you can try it out - see the App store on the Mac

 

[The Johnster]

On 08/12/2020 at 13:31, Kris said:

Here is a basic outline. There should be a station at the top. The yellow is the goods yard. At the bottom is the fiddle yard. There are gradients involved to make this work. The bottom most lines would be higher than the fiddle yard allowing these to be scenic in some way (or hidden in others). 

 

If possible I would suggest squeezing an extra 10cm on the width on the boards at the top and the right to make for a larger goods yard. 

 

You need to be sure you can easily reach the back roads of the fiddle yard and the running lines behind them as well.

 

Whatever extra width you can squeeze in will be of benefit, but particularly in the goods yard where access to roads for mileage and room for the goods shed is needed.  Appearance will be improved if you can ease the curves and introduce gentle curvature on the main running lines. which will sit more naturally in the scenery that way.  It also gives more room in the corners, which can then be used for more background or private industry sidings according to your taste,

[fffrank]

Finally some movement on this grand plan. here's where I've got to - all criticism welcolmed!

 

it's all Peco code 55, will be DCC operated. This plan is based on an old Hornby module - the top part is as far as I've got, need to think of something clever to fit into the bottom half (although I'm going for a scenic section with just a couple of tracks running through it). 

 

 

[ITG]

Couple of very quick observations……

1. it may look better to eradicate that ‘wriggle’ just above and to the left of the turntable. Looks to be caused by using curved turnouts back to back.

2. No run round loop, other than by a loco using the turntable? Operationally that’s messy. Maybe a loop opposite the platform using the long siding?

[fffrank]

Thanks!

 

Here's my second stab. How does it look?

 

 

 

 

 

[ITG]

Probably should have mentioned before, but I didn’t spot it at a quick glance. What are the sidings bottom left for? If for either goods or passenger vehicles, you can only access them from the through line, by pulling a very short train onto the line beyond the crossover, and then reversing back on to the turntable line, then forward again on to said sidings (which are longer than either the access line near the crossover, or the line before the turntable.) If the sidings are only intended as loco storage, it kind of makes more sense, but then where would goods/passenger vehicles not in use be stored?

 

If the inner curve to the left terminates, that could be a head shunt, off which the sidings fan out, in the opposite direction to how you have them; thus separating the loco facilities apart from the sidings. The whole question of sidings may depend on how you plan to operate, ie are the goods trains are to be shunted by the train loco (almost a single loco in steam approach) or will there be a dedicated shunter? How many locos do you plan to operate? (I assume tender steam, otherwise no need for a turntable?)

 

Try tracing train movements with your finger, remembering at which end a loco is. And it might be helpful for you to determine actually what sidings are for? Goods shed, passenger coach storage, cattle dock, private factory, loco storage etc. when you get to scenic stages, you’ll need to have considered that anyway, so best to do so now, at the planning stage. And label the plan, as it makes it easier for people to interpret your thinking, and thus help.

[fffrank]

2 hours ago, ITG said:

Probably should have mentioned before, but I didn’t spot it at a quick glance. What are the sidings bottom left for? If for either goods or passenger vehicles, you can only access them from the through line, by pulling a very short train onto the line beyond the crossover, and then reversing back on to the turntable line, then forward again on to said sidings (which are longer than either the access line near the crossover, or the line before the turntable.) If the sidings are only intended as loco storage, it kind of makes more sense, but then where would goods/passenger vehicles not in use be stored?

 

If the inner curve to the left terminates, that could be a head shunt, off which the sidings fan out, in the opposite direction to how you have them; thus separating the loco facilities apart from the sidings. The whole question of sidings may depend on how you plan to operate, ie are the goods trains are to be shunted by the train loco (almost a single loco in steam approach) or will there be a dedicated shunter? How many locos do you plan to operate? (I assume tender steam, otherwise no need for a turntable?)

 

Try tracing train movements with your finger, remembering at which end a loco is. And it might be helpful for you to determine actually what sidings are for? Goods shed, passenger coach storage, cattle dock, private factory, loco storage etc. when you get to scenic stages, you’ll need to have considered that anyway, so best to do so now, at the planning stage. And label the plan, as it makes it easier for people to interpret your thinking, and thus help.

 

Thanks again for most helpful feedback (the finger tracing tip is v valuable). I see the point - my guide here was this. To be honest, I think it's problematic, stuffing too much track into the limited space I have. Will go back to the drawing board somewhat!

 

[fffrank]

V2 - a variation on a Freezer "small locations" plan which builds on the Hornby version above. CJF includes this as a terminus, but I'd like to have continual running, so have extended the line to the left - not sure where that will lead.

 

From left to right, the buildings are a cattle dock, station, signal cabin and coal depot, water tank, loco shed and milk depot. The two sidings at the bottom (which I like as they don't need to be entirely parallel to the baseboard edge) are for a coal yard - so perhaps the continuous run could be to a mine.

 

 

Edited January 6, 2022 by fffrank
Clarity

[ITG]

 The Hornby set track plan does indicate the lower roads to be for locos, even to the inclusion of a loco shed etc. The whole plan is really built around a station with (relatively) huge loco facilities. Ok if that’s what you want, although the translation to N gauge allows the extension of those sidings to perhaps be better utilised. Within the context of the whole layout, and the space you have, I’m not sure it is best use of space.

 

Re your latest plan, take a look at the double X crossings and (what look like) double slips (?). To me, they seem an unnecessary complication, as to how trains access platform roads, milk depot, coal facilities and turntable. If your coal roads are fullish, you cannot get a loco out of the turntable/shed.

 

Have a look at Harlequins track plans 

There’s some great ideas on there, and are much better aligned to the prototype than many of the set track plans.  Many will convert in part or full to N.
Do be patient, time spent now will be the most valuable ever in your modelling journey, and potentially enhance satisfaction, and reduce cost and frustration.

[ITG]

Another thought - how long are the trains you wish to run? Your platform and run round loop looks to be around 80cm, which would be around 5 coaches plus loco. ( I’m no N gauge expert by the way!) 

[Kris]

I wonder if there might be benefits in mirroring the plan to make the station closer to the inside edge.

[AndrueC]

You mention that you'd like continual running - me too! My current layout was designed to achieve that, which it does, but suffers from staging yards that only have a single entrance. This means that to run a train I first have to reverse it out of the yards onto the main line. Then when I'm finished I have to drive the train back up to its siding. It doesn't sound like a hugely complicated operation and it isn't - it only requires one turnout to be flicked twice. However it's enough to put me off just popping up to the layout for a ten minute run. The knock-on effect of that is that the layout doesn't get run so often which makes me a little nervous in case the occasions when I do run it turn up a glitch.

 

It depends on your view of shunting. Up to now I have been indifferent to it and my experience of N scale couplers makes me even less keen on it. There is always the possibility that if I actually set aside a genuine afternoon for 'train playing' I might realise that a little shunting can be fun. Since I model a modern layout I don't really need shunting anyway.

 

A reasonable compromise would probably be a single pass through siding (or a platform) where one train could be parked ready to go.

[AndrueC]

On 06/01/2022 at 19:13, ITG said:

Another thought - how long are the trains you wish to run? Your platform and run round loop looks to be around 80cm, which would be around 5 coaches plus loco. ( I’m no N gauge expert by the way!) 

800mm will only be enough for diesel+4 modern coaches. For 5 modern coaches+diesel you need 850mm. For steam 800mm might be enough for a 4-6-2 and 5 shorter Maunsell coaches but I think that'd be a tight fit.

 

I find that my 850mm sidings can house 6 Maunsells+Queen Elizabeth if I park her front partially on top of a turnout. They can also store an entire six unit class 43 but nothing longer. The number of wagons of course depends on the length. One of my trains has 7 silver bullet wagons but another only has 5 Cargowaggons.

Edited January 11, 2022 by AndrueC