First Layout

[mkrob]

Hi all,

I’m slowly(very slowly),building my first layout. The room I’m using is a multi-use room, as bedroom,storeroom & train room, hence the fairly large space in the middle. My track plan is a fairly simple double track with stock siding, motive power depot & 2 island platforms. I have plenty of flexitrack & some settrack(for sidings). I haven't really decided where on the main lines to put changeover points from a logistics point of view.

I’d appreciate any comments,ideas or design tips. Thanks, in anticipation.

 

mkrob

[Kris]

From an operational viewpoint a second crossover to the outer line would be helpful. 

Whilst you normally would avoid facing points you could justify yours if you consider the centre platform to be bi-directional (you would need the other cross over to make this work). 

[mkrob]

Interesting idea Kris. Do you mean on the left hand board?

[ITG]

What scale is this in? If 00, looks to be some tight radii, which not all stock will negotiate trouble free. Also, some variance in track spacing on that left hand board.

[mkrob]

It's OO scale & with 3rd or 4th radius-ish (on the main lines), except for the sidings. Regarding a second crossover,did you mean something like that,on the left hand side?

[Kris]

That looks about right for the crossover. Again its a facing crossover but that's what makes the centre platform bi-directional. 

As a note aside it is rare to get a line that is served by 2 platform faces (as your centre line is). Yeovil Pen Mill is such an example. 

[RobinofLoxley]

Hello Rob,

 

In your slowly built layout, have you already acquired the points, the selected items on the drawing would appear to be setrack spec, although I cant be certain . If you already have them it is what it is, otherwise you could look at the effect of using streamline points on the main crossings. This affects the track spacing all the way round the layout.

[mkrob]

Hi Robin,

I have some streamline points already (SL-E88 & 89) for use on the main lines. The sidings will be setrack which I also have.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

13 hours ago, mkrob said:

It's OO scale & with 3rd or 4th radius-ish (on the main lines), except for the sidings. Regarding a second crossover,did you mean something like that,on the left hand side?

Hi there - if I could make a couple of simple suggestions:

 

1.  While Yeovil Pen Mill quoted by @Kris is a UK example of a station with platforms both sides of a through line, a more common example would be to have the platforms outside the two main lines.  If you wanted to do this, all you’d need to do would be to swap the lower platform with the track below it.  You’d then have a platform on the outside and could put a low-relief station building along the wall as well.

 

2.  This would make it clear to any observe that the two main lines are the bottom two running through the station, while the third line that feeds the sidings is a loop line - trains could be expected to run both ways through a loop line like this, which justifies the facing points off the main lines to get in and and out.

 

3.  To make this easier on the left hand side, I’d bring the point for entering the loop down a bit, and move the crossover you’ve added above it - trains can then run through the ladder of points to get from the loop to the outside line.

 

4.  The other thing I’d be wary of is the tight curves in the sidings at the top right corner - you’ll most likely find it very difficult to couple up coaches or wagons on those tight curves.  It may be you need them for the length of trains you’re running, but an alternative would be to have slightly shorter, straight sidings that don’t go round the corner, and keep the top baseboard for a scenic run.

 

You can certainly have fun running trains with a plan like this, and if your setting is a more modern one, the straightforward track arrangements would match the rationalised ones on the UK railway.  Have fun, Keith.

 

Edited June 2, 2021 by Keith Addenbrooke

[mkrob]

Thanks for the suggestions Keith.I moved the platform to the outside as you suggested & adjusted the track to compensate with about 3rd radius curves. Regarding your 3rd suggestion, I moved the points around which does look better,thank you. The curves in the sidings are a minimum of 19.9inch, which seems OK but not having any experience of coaches/wagon coupling in siding I don't know. I will be using sets of coaches but wagons is another matter.

 

 

[Flying Pig]

5 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

2.  This would make it clear to any observe that the two main lines are the bottom two running through the station, while the third line that feeds the sidings is a loop line - trains could be expected to run both ways through a loop line like this, which justifies the facing points off the main lines to get in and and out.

 

 

This makes particular sense as both sets of sidings spring from the inner loop so that's where trains can be expected to start and terminate.

[Flying Pig]

A few more comments:

 

- there seems to be a mixture of setrack and streamline points used on the plan; I think you can do it entirely with streamline which will look and run better even if you use the short points;

 

- you will need to be careful about track spacing which is a little inconsistent as currently drawn; curves below 30" radius may need to be laid at setrack spacing which is wider than that given by a crossover formed by streamline points; curves below 24" radius almost certainly will; 

 

- would the dreaded headshunt (see below) be useful for shunting the rh sidings without blocking the loop platform? I appreciate this would be tricky to arrange given the positions of the curve and baseboard joint;

 

- I'm a little unclear as to what the arrowed crossover is for; if it is meant to provide a runround within the sidings, that looks rather short as it is currently placed.

 

[Harlequin]

The two turnouts against the inner platform face might cause problems of vehicles with long overhangs fouling the platform.

 

610mm (24inch) radii and above should work fine at normal Streamline spacing (51mm) for most rolling stock. Only very long coaches or locos with long noses, like the APT, might have a problem with it.

 

If you went to Streamline and Flexitrack, you could escape the Setrack straightjacket and make everything more flowing and realistic. The investment in the layout over the years will far exceed any small saving you might make now by using existing Setrack parts you have so it might be a false economy to stick with it...

 

[mkrob]

Thanks for all the suggestions guys. I've done another update of the layout, see what you think! I would like to have wider curves, so I'll have another tinker.

Flying Pig-I got rid of that crossover,its not needed is it! The head shunt may be useful. I'm a little bit wary about track spacing on corners, so I will look into that. on the right hand sidings. Thanks Flying Pig.

Harlequin (Phil) - I may have to shorten the platform to avoid overhang problems. In the long term all streamline points would be better. Thanks Phil.

 

[mkrob]

Oops, wrong one!!!! Finger trouble.

[fezza]

For a first layout I would recommend something like Kato unitrack. It is very robust so you can try many  different layouts before settling on one. It comes ready ballasted and all the points come with motors and wires attached. There are loads of track plans you can simply adopt to your own space. It is so easy even my missus who has no interest in the hobby built a layout with it in a matter of minutes for the lad. It is a bit more expensive but has a long life and can be used many times on different layouts 

[mkrob]

Thanks for the info Fezza, unfortunately I have a box full of Peco streamline flexitrack, plus streamline points  & in hindsight Kato unitrack may have been a better option.  Perhaps I should sell all my track on Ebay for a ridiculous price (sarcasm) & buy Kato unitrack instead.

[fezza]

Flexitrack is great if you can get on with it. The key is to measure and cut it correctly and fix it down without sharp kinks at the rail joints. It is not desperately hard but it does need a bit of patience. You also need to make sure there are no rough or bent edges on the cut parts of the track that might cause problems fitting rail joiners. 

[Chimer]

I think I would restrict the Set-track curves to the bottom left hand corner, and elsewhere use flexi with the largest possible radii to for your basic double track mainline, so coming close to the inside corners round the bends and wide to the outside down the straight sides.  Something like this ........ 

 

Obviously you have to mess up the smooth curves to fit in crossovers, sidings etc, which is a bit of a faff.  Streamline curved points can be helpful ..... and triangular baseboard fillets (bigger if poss than the one you already show inside your top right corner) help it look better.  But the big gain to my mind is getting away from having tight 90 degree turns in every corner, joined by straight tracks parallel to the baseboard edge.  The tightest parts of the sweeping curve round the right hand side are at 40" radius.

 

Good luck anyway ....

[Flying Pig]

4 hours ago, mkrob said:

 

 

Not sure about that right hand yard.  You've swapped a few long sidings for more rather short ones which won't be so useful for storing trains between runs,if that's what you were wanting to do with them.  Aren't there still some setrack points in the loco yard?

[TonyMay]

One thing nobody has mentioned is era, even just "steam era" or "diesel ear", or which region you want to set it in.  I suggest it's a good idea to think about these now, even if the ultimate conclusion is the application of rule 1.

 

[F2Andy]

Personally, I would rearrange the platforms so from the top it goes platform-track-track-platform-track. You could then put a station building on the top platform, where you have some space for scenery. Of course, some rearranging of points would be required, and it might not work so well in that regard, but might be worth considering.

[mkrob]

Hi Guys,

Chimer-thanks for your suggestions. I will be using flexi for all the main lines and will make the radii as large as possible & add some triangular fillets where necessary.

Flying Pig-the rolling stock sidings will probably be made up of set-track  & longer because ,as you say, they are shorter than before. Thanks for the advice.

TonyMay- Rule 1 applies for me. Thank you.

F2Andy- I'll try it with the platforms like that & see how it works out. Thank you.

 

 

 

I think, like in all layouts, compromises have to be made.

[mkrob]

HI Guys,

Here's another version with more amendments which I'm sure will have more changes, like storage sidings .

[Harlequin]

With tracks very close the the walls all around, how will you make it look realistic, scenically?

 

A retaining wall behind the track can look realistic and it's a good space-saving way to disguise the join but it would probably look odd if you used that trick all the way around.

 

Best to have a bit of space between track and wall to place things like low-relief buildings, low-relief shrubs, may some rising ground, etc, etc...