4ft x 6ft 00 Designs

[Keith Addenbrooke]

As a general observation, one of the interesting aspects to this design challenge (irrespective of scale) is to devise a compact continuous run layout that will work visually from both the inside of the operating well for home use as well as from the outside for exhibitions / meets.

 

(There are many cases of linear layouts that can operated from either the front or back, but that is so they can always be viewed from the front).

 

On a practical note, I wonder if the current suggestions are perhaps pushing the tracks too near the edge? @Harlequin's to-scale sketch shows how tight the clearances are, for example: 

 

19 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

...Having things very close to the baseboard edge at home is OK, but it courts disaster at meetings or exhibitions. The problem is usually tail-swing on 2-6-4T and 0-4-4T tank engines, which sweeps way outside the track on these tight curves. That combined with an enthusiastic arm wave, and the sleeve of a tweed jacket (still the older old-fashioned 0-gauger’s garb of choice), and “crash, bang, wallop”...

 

21 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

...

 

That's just to show that it basically slots together - I haven't paid any attention to baseboard joints!...

 

Outside edge clearance is something I've become really conscious of with Narrow Gauge modelling, where trains are much wider than track, and very easily knocked off (no need to ask how I know  ).

 

Finally, just to note for those playing in Anyrail: the Maldon Y point doesn't seem to show in the track library, but I believe it is a standard piece of track (as opposed to bespoke curved points etc. that can be made to order as I understand it, but are priced accordingly).

 

Just some thoughts, Keith.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

15 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

…On the other hand, I do like your single station roundy of 26th October.

 

Do you mean this one?

 

On 26/10/2021 at 14:40, Nearholmer said:

Well folks, despite the ingenuity and attractions of the terminus-based designs, I keep coming back to where I started, with a basic oval, because it doesn’t cramp a longer train, is simple to fit onto baseboard units of half-sensible dimensions, and because it permits all the typical things to be included - it’s like a through station and fiddle yard layout, short-circuited to have no fiddle yard!

 

It would certainly have appeal as an “old fashioned train set” at meetings/exhibitions.

 

Here’s a version using somewhat more generous curves, which I know looks better.

 

 

 

For a home layout - a typical ‘spare room’ set up, I’d agree it has a lot going for it - longer trains can be run and quite a bit more stock can be stored on the layout without impeding running (also useful when friends bring their pieces along to visit, which I think is maybe more common in the Coarse O-scale world than perhaps with other genres?).  For me however, the position of the Station and Platform on the outside means I’d be concerned it may not work so well visually at exhibitions / meets:

 

7 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

As a general observation, one of the interesting aspects to this design challenge (irrespective of scale) is to devise a compact continuous run layout that will work visually from both the inside of the operating well for home use as well as from the outside for exhibitions / meets.

 

That’d perhaps be the drawback?

[Nearholmer]

2 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I wonder if the current suggestions are perhaps pushing the tracks too near the edge?

I’m very conscious of that possibility. I’m thinking that it might be necessary to put ‘crash barriers’ on outer edges when exhibiting on some of these.

 

Your point about inside and out is very well made too, and I’m thinking hard about that as well. Exhibition layouts have to have a bit of showmanship about them, so this has to look very interesting from the outside.

 

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Nearholmer

[woodenhead]

9 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I’m very conscious of that possibility. I’m thinking that it might be necessary to put ‘crash barriers’ on outer edges when exhibiting on some of these.

 

 

 

Perspex screen around the outside to protect it from prodding and other sticky out bits colliding with trains?

 

Even makes you Covid secure - a proper consideration these days

[kipford]

How about, modified Cyril Freezer plan from 50 plans for small layouts. Adds a bit more operational interest. Original plan with my sketched mods and the final version I built for my son.

[KingEdwardII]

1 hour ago, kipford said:

modified Cyril Freezer plan

Looks great - but how did that hidden point underneath the terminus station work out? Did you get any problems with derailments or locos stalling there that were hard to deal with?

[Nearholmer]

How big is that, though?

[Nearholmer]

2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Perspex screen around the outside

I’m mulling less intrusive possibilities, robust line- side fences and/or walls, that sort of thing.

 

As to Covid, with prevalence as it is currently, and the general lackadaisical attitude to precautions, I wouldn’t even consider exhibiting indoors - a day or two spent inhaling other people’s recent exhalations does not feel like a good plan at the moment.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Clearance needs to work both ways:

 

4 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Perspex screen around the outside to protect it from prodding and other sticky out bits colliding with trains?

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

I’m mulling less intrusive possibilities, robust line- side fences and/or walls, that sort of thing..

There needs to be enough room for trains to circulate without colliding into any screens / walls fastened around the edge of the layout too - front buffer beams of 4-4-0 locomotives (as one example) can protrude quite a way outside the line of a sharp curve.

[Nearholmer]

It can, but I have a wall two and a half inches from track centre on my existing layout, and even the Stanier 2-6-4T, which has greater swing than anything else, has plenty of clearance.

 

 

Foreshortening makes the station look even smaller than it really is here!

 

I think I’m settling onto this plan, because I’ve now started fiddling about with ‘scenery’, which means I can picture it in my head.

 

As you will see, I’ve rammed quite a lot of ‘play value’ into this; a true to train-set layout.

 

 

I reckon I can squeeze a couple of inches out, to pull the top track a tiny bit further from the baseboard edge.

 

 

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, kipford said:

How about, modified Cyril Freezer plan from 50 plans for small layouts. Adds a bit more operational interest. Original plan with my sketched mods and the final version I built for my son.

I believe that two of Kevin's "givens" were a footprint equivalent to a 00 6' x 4'; and no gradients.

[andi4x4]

On 21/10/2021 at 18:03, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Maldon track does now appear on Anyrail (it may need an update to appear).  I've only had a bit of time this afternoon, but I wanted to have a go at answering the question and got this far:

 

 I sent them an email a couple of months ago asking if it would be possible to add Maldon to the track list and included a link to the website. Looks like they took me seriously !

 

Lots of interesting track plans appearing here !

 

Regards !

 

Andi

[Harlequin]

Here's a plan that attempts to fit a terminus inside an outer running circuit. It has goods points and bad points...

 

The outer circuit gives a long continuous run and uses R3 (34") radius curves for smooth fast running except the top right corner, which is R1 (27") and suggested as being hidden in some way.

The outer circuit C/L is 2.5" from the edges, minimum.

Run round at terminus should have clearance for 3 coaches.

The run round spur becomes turntable - just for fun.

There's a lifting flap at bottom left - but I plonked a Dairy on it.

Shunting the terminus means fouling the main line...

Some parts may be a tight fit.

 

Edited April 12, 2022 by Harlequin

[Nearholmer]

Another interesting one; thank you. The turntable ending and loco shed are so in-keeping with 1910-1940 layout designs.

 

For the edification or interest of those not familiar with old r-t-r 0, I thought I would show how short a reasonable-looking (to me anyway) three coach train can be. A gnat’s over 1100mm, using BL ‘blood and custards’.

 

 

Excuse the even larger scale train looming in the background, although that itself makes the point that c14mm/ft can be very compact too, if you choose very small prototypes.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Zomboid]

WRT @Harlequin's turntable end, could you lose the points and just have two exits from the table to complete the run round? Bembridge/ Ramsgate Harbour/ any number of NG railway style... Would handle another carriage that way, I think.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Zomboid

[Keith Addenbrooke]

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Here's a plan that attempts to fit a terminus inside an outer running circuit. It has goods points and bad points...

 

The outer circuit gives a long continuous run and uses R3 (34") radius curves for smooth fast running except the top right corner, which is R1 (27") and suggested as being hidden in some way.

The outer circuit C/L is 2.5" from the edges, minimum.

Run round at terminus should have clearance for 3 coaches.

The run round spur becomes turntable - just for fun.

There's a lifting flap at bottom left - but I plonked a Dairy on it.

Shunting the terminus means fouling the main line...

Some parts may be a tight fit.

 

Bringing the terminus inside the running line looks like a big win with this plan - no reaching over the running line as trains go past.  Trickiest bit would seem to me to be concealing the hidden trackage behind the turntable - if a hidden section is desired, there may be a little bit more room in the North-West corner as an alternative? (The tight fit in parts is of course noted as inevitable in this space).

 

Edited November 5, 2021 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Nearholmer]

The challenge with any ‘inside’ terminus is the restriction in length caused by the circuit curling round the outside.  Harlequin has risen to that challenge, but I personally think that ‘outside’ fits the brief here better.

 

I’ve got one inside, and one outside, on my main layout, so can run one to the other, which is my favourite, but it all gets too big for a portable layout without a crack squad of people to shift it about.

 

This thread does tempt me to re-start yet another project: an actual 00 6x4, as a way of getting out of my system the “1963 layout” idea, involving use of things that were on the market at that date, which keeps resurfacing in my mind. First generation Dublo 2-rail points, they would be the key - live frogs. An Airfix windmill, a Builteezi dairy, and one of those improbably small tea shoppes that I think were Triang mode-land kits. Pure nostalgia.

 

But, I have to hold fast to the reason that I prefer giant Dublo over real Dublo: the 0 gauge version runs so much better!

Edited November 5, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Harlequin]

14 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

The challenge with any ‘inside’ terminus is the restriction in length caused by the circuit curling round the outside.  Harlequin has risen to that challenge, but I personally think that ‘outside’ fits the brief here better.

 

 

A possibly better idea occurred to me over lunch that might solve many of the issues with that plan.

 

Unfortunately I have to work... So I can't get back to it until later.

 

[Harlequin]

Here's the revised idea:

 

This one brings everything together quite nicely, IMHO:

• The terminus platform is now double-sided and shared with the main running circuit, like some of your previous drawings, @Nearholmer.
• The high level station building, again from your own drawings, is present with a covered stairway down to the platform, and with forecourt behind and whatever else you'd like to put up there. This covers the R1 radius section of the main circuit.
• There's a long enough lead-in from the terminus to allow it to be shunted without affecting the main circuit.
• The terminus run round loop is generous.
• The various sidings are just suggestions. There's lots of scope to add, remove or shift things around as needed. (Empty space on the right could be accessed in various ways.)
• As before the main circuit uses R3 curves wherever it's visible.
• The lifting flap now just has plain track crossing it and the dairy is now on the main boards, off the "country station" loop, just as you'd expect.

Note that there is a small discontinuity in the tracks where the the terminus lead-in meets the "country station" loop. I left it visible but I'm sure it could be massaged out in real life.

 

Edited April 12, 2022 by Harlequin

[Zomboid]

I wonder how much space that would need in OO. Will have to have a go in anyrail...

[Nearholmer]

56 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

This one brings everything together quite nicely, IMHO:

 

That is very good indeed!

 

I think if I was building a fixed, spare room layout, that the one I'd go for from all we've had so far.

 

It isn't compatible with the baseboards I've committed to for portability, but it is a really smart design.

[Harlequin]

Thanks. I get the message that you've committed to baseboards and you're going to do something different. (Shame, though!)

 

I beg everyone's forbearance while I push on a bit further and improve my design. I had some new ideas overnight:

 

 

• More storage at the main station.
• Better siding connection in top left corner - it no longer crosses a baseboard joint and the points are alongside the loop entry points, where both are under the control of the nearby signal box.
• Main circuit angled by 6° at bottom so that it doesn't slavishly follow the baseboard edge. This allows the country passing station to have a longer platform and for the line to run through the countryside (in an imaginary, coarse O gauge kind of way). This is achieved by cutting some curved parts to give 6° and 12° turning angles.
• The trees are speculative...

I'd like to post this in my track plans album eventually but I need a name. Any suggestions?

 

Edited April 12, 2022 by Harlequin

[St Enodoc]

9 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Thanks. I get the message that you've committed to baseboards and you're going to do something different. (Shame, though!)

 

I beg everyone's forbearance while I push on a bit further and improve my design. I had some new ideas overnight:

 

 

• More storage at the main station.
• Better siding connection in top left corner - it no longer crosses a baseboard joint and the points are alongside the loop entry points, where both are under the control of the nearby signal box.
• Main circuit angled by 6° at bottom so that it doesn't slavishly follow the baseboard edge. This allows the country passing station to have a longer platform and for the line to run through the countryside (in an imaginary, coarse O gauge kind of way). This is achieved by cutting some curved parts to give 6° and 12° turning angles.
• The trees are speculative...

I'd like to post this in my track plans album eventually but I need a name. Any suggestions?

 

How about "Maldon" or is that too corny?

[Zomboid]

@Harlequin that does look good. It looks like it's a gnats whisker from having a second platform at the bottom station. I suppose it's questionable how much of an improvement that would be as it would probably further reduce the not exactly extensive freight capability. But I'd be tempted to go all in with passenger operation in that case anyway.

[RJS1977]

38 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

@Harlequin that does look good. It looks like it's a gnats whisker from having a second platform at the bottom station. I suppose it's questionable how much of an improvement that would be as it would probably further reduce the not exactly extensive freight capability. But I'd be tempted to go all in with passenger operation in that case anyway.

 

I was going to suggest having a long bay platform at the bottom of the second station to act as an opposing terminus. As there isn't room for a run-round loop, another loco would need to take the train out (possibly based in the spur in the TR corner).

 

Of course, expanding the station in this way could lose the 'country' feel.