Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

Fascinating to see your evolution from US through to DE via CIE etc.

 

Since 2007 I've tried OO preserved BLT, 70's roundy, German roundy, Scottish roundy with BLT on two levels, N gauge  on two levels from 101 US plans, Swiss HOm on three levels, TT using HOm track, then N again and finally HO OBB/DB on three levels all on a 9x9 baseboard with a 3ft square added for a helix.

 

After so much spaghetti track work hidden away to create three levels at 0, 3 and 6  with return loops I realised I was tying myself in knots. So, this week I opted for a re-design with just two levels and return loops which opens up the space and reduces the points from 27 to 15. Less is more.

 

I take your excellent point about early influences and for me these were watching trains run along an embankment incline and hearing locos work hard climbing north of Bridlington. Also seeing a busy summer station and shunting across the roadway to the goods yard. On a layout that translates into enjoyment of trains running through landscape and also shunting in sidings. Nostalgia didn't do it for me and I like up to date stock which is where OO is a problem. In a smallish space UK stock with 23m lengths is just too unrealistic. 12 inch long locos are not so good either, so I've settled for HO and the ultra reliable Trix or Piko expert locos that run like a dream. I mix 1:100 carriages with full length as a compromise. 

I'm aiming for satisfaction not just enjoyment and this I find comes with many things working well together. I suppose for me satisfaction is really the absence or minimising of irritation when running the layout.  

 

 

Watching your changes has helped see I am not alone in ripping everything up and starting again several times. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Railpassion
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Railpassion said:

I'm aiming for satisfaction not just enjoyment and this I find comes with many things working well together. I suppose for me satisfaction is really the absence or minimising of irritation when running the layout.  

 

Excellently articulated, that's it in a nutshell - trying to find the combination of all the elements that work together has been quite a journey. 

 

It's certainly not over yet, the current bugbear is the Peco turnouts.  Variable quality control in construction is giving rise to variable quality running which is high on the irritation scale!

 

I've tried fettling but still they are not 100% smooth.  It doesn't help that the flanges on the HO stock are far bigger than they need be, but if they run fine on Roco Code 83, they should run fine on Peco Code 83... but they don't.  

  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lacathedrale said:

Presumably the chair moulding is bigger, even though the rail height is the same?

 

 

 

It seems to be a problem with the depth of the crossing V and the guard rails.   They're not deep enough, and they're inconsistent even across the same point.

 

The plain track is fine.  There are no chairs as such, as it's flat bottom with spikes and plates.

 

But I have a cunning plan...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dr G-F,

That gradient will present no problems to your German outline stock!

On my friend Dougies layout, that I constructed, I gave him a grade of 1 in 40, using good quality plywood with plenty of braces to ensure stability and evenness, he can run trains of 11 bogie coaches behind his steamers with no problems.

The, on here, much derided traction tyres are to thank for this! Not to mention, smooth and free running coaches of course. Roco traction tyres don’t really last that long, I admit but as long as we keep spares in stock, even klutzy von  sausage fingers, Doug can change them!

Cheers,

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dr, I think satisfaction is key and everyone will have a favourite focus be it operations, running, scenery, realism, etc. For me operations and scale running speeds are high on my list. I've been to many shows where brilliant scenic models are ruined by Evil Knieval at the power controls. Recently I've enjoyed watching some of the large US basement layouts. They seem very satisfying for watching the trains go by. 

 

I'm using Woodland Scenics risers for a 3% rise in around 8 ft. I've had no problems with mainline locos up to 7 coaches. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Railpassion I think it's easy to get a misunderstanding of scale speed - both too fast AND too slow. There are many recollections of drivers and firemen clouting wagons around at speed, or shunters racing back to the platform ends behind the trains they've just piloted. Clearly, not quite as simple as just going 'as slow as possible' although that does often give great visual flavour.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lacathedrale I agree. Today young people see steam on preserved lines and can come to believe they moved slowly. They also do not hear the sound of clanking buffers which was heard in most towns at breakfast time up until the early '80's. I did not witness steam but saw 20's and 31's shunting the pick up goods and the shunter swinging on the pole.

 

DCC has enabled very slow running which is a huge bonus  but it can often bore at exhibitions. I was at York the other year and saw a very large and brilliant modern layout where all trains, both on the mains and the slows, were crawling along at no more than 30 throughout the afternoon. There was no impression of speed on the expresses and I was a little surprised as the punters expect a turn of speed on a large layout.

 

After my jab this morning I discovered Smiths is selling the latest Model Railroad Planning. A US short line could be my next attempt.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Railpassion
  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been tinkering with the hidden return loop/staging tracks, and the low level station.  Anything shown with a broken line is hidden from normal view.  

 

This is now all laid out with RocoLine code 83.  This was prompted by my ongoing unsatisfactory experience with Peco turnouts and some helpful suggestions from John (Allegheny1600 of this parish)

 

Where the track stops bottom left is the beginning of the 2% (1 in 50) ramp up to the station level.  I am still tinkering with the station plan, which means browsing the internet for inspiration.  I found a lot more when I searched for gleisplan...  I've finally included the naughty crossover which allows for continuous running for those times when you just need to gaze slack jawed at a small train going round and round.  

 

This arrangement could sit under almost any terminus, (not just a DB one!) and I'm quite pleased with it.  

 

1546227736_ShedLowlevel02.jpg.d0a06e4cb2b1cf0162bf01cc2bc4ddd7.jpg

 

RocoLine is blooming pricey, but I've sold all my CNR stock and once the CIE and BR(S) is gone there should be some money in the pot...

 

Edited by Dr Gerbil-Fritters
  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you plan to access the back of the top-right corner? Cutouts? The top half of the plan does indeed look very 'universal' and I imagine should your whims change at any point in the future, it would support any number of layouts 'above'. 

 

I might be inclined to slew the passing station more opposite the baloon  to get it on a curve, and then include the junction as part of the throat of the station - it would give a bit of space on the right before diving under the terminus approach?

 

Did you consider tillig elite? I'm still musing on plans for h0 so insight there would be interesting.

Edited by Lacathedrale
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking good. Have you considered less hidden track? The north side is understandably hidden but could the south side single line be made an embankment or wooded feature? It sounds a bit nuts but with suitable separation and scenic blocks it could give you a taste of the rural in addition to all your station working. I had so much hidden track on my layout that it became a really frustrating as I realised that most of each train journey was out of sight. The sense of journey was lost.  Is concealment always a good thing? Does it limit the imagination?  Our brains tend to make things work on a model even if actual distances are absurd in reality. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

 

Did you consider tillig elite? I'm still musing on plans for h0 so insight there would be interesting.

Hello William,

I hope Dr G-F won’t mind me repeating what I have said to him!

I’ll just add a little context first: a few years ago, I was a member of a small club in the north west of England and they had recently sold their single large exhibition layout and were building a new one.

 I had recently made quite an investment in Tillig track, having been sold on it by the importer, International Models, at an exhibition in London. Showing my new club how nice it is, they decided to go all out and use it for the new layout. My layout was called Flixborough Wharf but the club layout is mothballed.

For some reason, my old club decided to build the fiddle yard boards first, this absorbed lots of track of course but we then discovered that;

1. the track is very delicate indeed, particularly the tie bars.

2. several club members were simply too clumsy and fat fingered to go near this track as, if they did, they broke it.

3. only modern UK outline stock will run through reliably, older British or European stock with coarser flanges was very unreliable.

 

My conclusions therefore are that Tillig Elite is gorgeous, expensive and very delicate indeed. It is not robust or reliable enough for general use and only works well with a wheel standard such as RP25.

Note: a search on here will produce results that show Tillig can be made reliable, please do take the time to read these discussions.

However, Roco-Line track is equally gorgeous and expensive but is far more robust and reliable and despite being code 83 in rail height, takes all but the coarsest of European stock. The range available is huge and is available with or without roadbed. But, do not mistake it for Roco Geo-Line as this is basically a toy range.

 

I would have no hesitation in using Peco code 83 plain track for hidden sidings, I hasten to add but even more importantly, continue using Roco-Line points everywhere. The necessity for bulletproof reliability is never more required than in hidden track. I think a length of Roco-Line flexy was running at about twice the price of a length of Peco, so the price difference is substantial. Curiously, the price difference between the points wasn’t so much but I don’t know how these costs are now.

Sorry for this rambling diatribe,

John

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Allegheny1600 said:

I would have no hesitation in using Peco code 83 plain track for hidden sidings, I hasten to add but even more importantly, continue using Roco-Line points everywhere. The necessity for bulletproof reliability is never more required than in hidden track.

 

I have hand built my own points, in many gauges, for years, using the copperclad method.

They are not pretty (well not as I buld them) but they can be made to work reliably and being home made are easy to fix.

 

I make this observation because a few years ago, on a whim, I decided to build a "third string" Scottish N gauge layout at short notice.

I bought Peco track to save time and effort, expecting it to be "bullet proof".

One third of the dozen or so items supplied caused problems and did not function correctly.

You can read all about it here if you are interested, although you will have to scroll down for the layout in question (Inverness Citadel).

 

The issues were resolved without too much difficulty but it does give cause for thought.

These were standard products that I expected to take out of a box and for them to work first time.

I paid good money for them and did not expect to have to fix problems.

 

Perhaps I had a bad batch or maybe Peco's quality control is not what it used to be.

In the light of experience, I would certainly test each item before placing it in hidden sidings rather than assuming that it would work.

 

Ian T

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

If only for this quote, I will read the lot:

 There;s a lot more where that came from!

For a more expanded version of my antithesis try this.

 

The background to the GNoSR is also covered on the website.

 I keep meaning to add more but never seem to find the time.

 

Ian T

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

the cult of the fiddle yard.

 

Which is why I'm expending so much brain power into devising a viable alternative.  So far, I've found nothing replicates the 'rest of the world' better than a hands-off return loop and staging tracks combo.

 

The only 'fiddling' with trains I want to be doing is proper shunting in a proper station. 

 

I spent some time glaring at a Peco turnout this afternoon to determine the cause of the running problems I've been having. 

 

Here everything looks fine and dandy....

20210226_162806.jpg.e8b631f68122a381d21a18877e1f593c.jpg

 

And here it's all gone Pete Tong

20210226_162818.jpg.a5863b2c67306aff32389abc69077d93.jpg

 

And here's the culprit... a dirty great wedge of unnecessary plastic in the crossing vee. 

20210226_163005.jpg.951df4ead3849f4ac816646f1aa857f6.jpg

 

So although the rail height is .083 of a whatsit, it must be less than half that through the crossing vee.

 

It's more noticeable with my DB dampfloks and two axle stock, but I realised it had been happening with my US and CIE diesels too... just not quite as noticeable.

 

I've tried running a file through to deepen it to no avail.  The wedge seems to vary in thickness from point to point.  Really, it just shouldn't be there.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...