Jump to content
 

Shelf Island (intertwined micros)


47137

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

I like micros, but I wanted something with a little more operating potential for my new layout. I am heading towards a layout made up of four or five "scenes" which frame each other so to speak like this:

 

post-14389-0-37582500-1428422226_thumb.jpg

 

The bridge carrying one line over another is something I have wanted in a layout for a while and difficult to arrange in a very small space, so I have settled for 2-wagon trains and diverging 1:20 gradients. The bridge and the tunnel help to divide the layout into areas. The red line is a NG track to join the mine to its processing plant physically and visually.

 

The idea is to work up each area as a micro layout in its own right. For example the junction can be ballasted like a main line (of a sort!), the mine railway and processing area can have ash ballast and the quay area some inset track. In the end, there will be trains running from one area to another, as well as to and from the fiddle yard.

 

I suppose this posting is a rather academic exercise and I'm not sure what benefit it will bring, but having the tracks on several different levels seems to help to break the whole thing up visually. Comments and suggestions welcome as always.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Interesting concept. From the title I was expecting a snake like line of micro layouts but your beside, behind and intertwined concept is far more intriguing. I look forward to seeing how it all pans out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The plan is a mirror image of a the Gum Stump and Snowshoe Railroad built by Chuck Yunkurth in the early 1960s - his original design is quoted as 72 x 12 inches in HO. There are more details and links in my blog for the layout.

 

I have taken the dimensions up to 74 inches long and 18 inches wide, the width increases to 19.5 inches at the right-hand end to make space for the 90-degree curve. I think I needed some of the extra space because modern points are longer than 1960s ones. I have space at home for a layout a few inches longer but I want to be able to carry it around on end e.g. through doorways ... the plan does not seem to suit being built on two shorter baseboards, I think this would be difficult to arrange.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Interesting concept. From the title I was expecting a snake like line of micro layouts but your beside, behind and intertwined concept is far more intriguing. I look forward to seeing how it all pans out.

Thanks for this, "intertwined" is a better word to describe what I am trying to do. I've changed the topic title to suit.

 

(Original topic title was "Linked micros to make one layout")

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I can think of one benefit of this approach; it is very nice to operate layouts with friends eg one runs the mainline, another the branch line. With intertwined micros, each operator can run his part of the layout, passing trains onto the next person, all in a small space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi great looking little model railway plan

 

At a recent Model Show in Sydney a little railway was displayed called Half Pint Creek it is in a similar style not the same but its under over is into a tunnel that goes to stageing at the back.

An over view photo below. Plus 2 scenes.

post-14985-0-08514100-1428764142.jpg

post-14985-0-55872400-1428764664.jpg

post-14985-0-92250300-1428764702.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I am now seeing the layout as three micros - a quayside area, a processing plant and a passenger halt - and some less-important "scenes" which separate and frame them, like the rail over bridge, the tunnel in front of it and the switch-back at the rear left. The layout will let me run trains from one place to another (or on/off scene to the fiddle yard) and this will be nice because it seems typical of narrow-gauge models but not standard-gauge ones.

 

I have plonked down some moulded retaining walls behind the quayside area and I can see how I can frame different areas with man-made structures like walls, or natural surfaces like rock cuttings. Now most of the track laying is done, the next stage must be a load of aesthetic decisions, to see what "looks right".

 

post-14389-0-35445400-1428787109.jpg

 

I am pleased with the shape of the mine branch (centre foreground below), it is not exactly "sensual" but I did take its alignment beyond what is needed for merely geological or structural reasons. This is good, because this physical shape will form the backbone to the model when it is viewed from the end. The layout is a very three-dimensional one and I think its success or failure will fall on its shape just as much as its detailing, texture or colour.

 

post-14389-0-24793200-1428787126.jpg

 

I now need to arrange the shape of the narrow gauge mine railway so it looks "ok" and even "interesting" but is subordinate to the shape of the mine branch and does not visually try to compete with it. The mock-up in the second photo is some pieces of Roco but I would like to hand-build something in code 60 rail so it all looks fairly minimal.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Does the narrow gauge run at a higher level than the standard gauge ? If you are handbuilding the track you could set them at the same level and intertwine them...

Yes - some interlaced track even! I did think about this but it seemed a bit outrageous on a model a scale one tenth of a mile long - any commercial organisation would take the NG down to the quay side and be done with it.

 

If the scissors are a tunnel mouth, the bottle of glue is the processing plant, and the bottle of hand cream is a bricked-up road overbridge, my present plan looks like this:

post-14389-0-07621100-1428825866.jpg

 

The NG line will go gently downhill from the mine (in an adit above the blue relays) to the processing plant. This will make life easier for the tiny NG locomotive and its hopper wagon full of palladium/nickel enriched limestone. The NG can cross the main line on a bridge in front of the tunnel mouth, then go around behind the processing plant and finally cross the standard gauge siding where the red track template is. The existing siding will be cut off by the yellow pin. The 90 degree curve allows a possible future extension. So there is still a nice bit off hand-made track, a skew and curved flat crossing on the siding, with mixed rail dimensions!

 

If the NG line operates automatically e.g. on a shuttle system, the flat crossing should make for some interesting shunting!!

 

Please everyone do feel free to mark up the photo and post it again if you have different ideas. I have run out of black foam board and there is no great hurry to lay this bit of track, I may need a better mock up of the processing plant first.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The NG line has got to go. I have made a start on some of the major structures for the layout - the tunnel mouth, the road over bridge and some retaining walls, and there is barely enough room. Without the NG line I can see a spacious, open-looking model which has a chance of being a bit "different" from many and has the potential to be quite interesting and pleasant to look at. As soon as I add the NG line, this end of the layout gets thrown completely out of balance. It's not "wrong" but it demands the other end carry lots of extra detail to restore the visual balance again. This will then become very cluttered. The first photo below is the best arrangement for the NG track I can manage.

post-14389-0-61433700-1429105251.jpg

 

I think it would be better to tuck a bit of NG track into the corner here, behind or inside the processing plant, and extend it like a tramway over the road bridge like this:

post-14389-0-76288200-1429105260.jpg

 

This keeps the flat crossing (over the red track template) too. I can then think of the mine as being off-scene, behind the processing plant or behind the viewer, or even two mines, one in each location. This is probably sounding too clever, but I could think about adding an extra deck onto the fiddle yard (just a plain NG track at a higher level at the back) to extend this track off-scene. Hmmm.

 

I've changed the title of the topic again, mainly to remind me of what I am trying to do. I promise I won't change it again.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a really great concept, can't wait to see how it develops... 

 

Whilst I can appreciate those layouts that strictly adhere to the prototype, I've got to say I do love a layout which is a bit of fun! Done well, this should be great way to showcase lots of different modelling techniques. That said, if you wanted, there's no reason that each little section can be prototypically "correct" viewed individually, even if the whole layout overall isn't.

 

It makes me want to give something like this a go... But I already have far too many projects that I want to do!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

With the NG line I'd say less is more, but I'm not sure you'll notice the loss that much, there's so much going on :)

 

Yes probably too much going on, but here goes with my list of objectives!

 

One of my favourite books on railway modelling is “Modelling Historic Railways” by David Jenkinson (first edition - Patrick Stephens 1985). Chapter 3 of the book is titled “Setting the objectives and isolating the essentials”, and I am still refining these after laying most of the track. Another source of inspiration is “How to go Railway Modelling” by Norman Simmonds” (second edition - Patrick Stephens 1975) and his chapter 4 “How to decide on scale and gauge”.
 
It is too easy to back-track and describe the layout I have built so far couched as a list of “objectives”, but I still have quite a lot of ideas for the layout:
 
1. Dual scale modelling - 00 and HO
Have a minimum of man-made structures which can determine the scale too tightly. Industrial plants are easy because they come in all sizes, but an innocuous item like a weighbridge hut will spoil the look if it is in the wrong scale for the train nearby. So make civil engineering structures from stone, steel or concrete, but not brick.
 
2. Sources and Movements of Traffic
I want a model of a railway system (small, self-contained, on an island) rather than a small piece of a huge one (like a branch line connecting to BR). Traffic can originate at the processing plant, the quayside, the passenger platform and (currently off-scene) the airport and the town. There will be a few movements not allowed (like passenger platform to quayside) but there are most of 2^(5-1) say 15 possible train movements.
 
3. Operating Practices
There will be a few restrictions e.g. locos must propel trains up the mine branch because there are no run-round facilities. However to make things more interesting I can impose artificial rules like “all freight trains through the tunnel must be hauled”. This will take some trains from the processing plant down to the quayside for the loco to run round. The quayside branch might be worked by a dedicated loco, and this would force the transfer of trains from one loco to another below the railway bridge. The bridge itself can have a fairly restrictive weight limit too. And so on.
 
4. Divide controls into three systems
 
a. Train control / traction - analogue to begin with, one train in steam, but wired for DCC
b. Track control / traffic - Bluetooth connection, to an Android smart phone to begin with but later a hand-held control box
c. Environment / ancillaries controls - a few toggle switches for working scenic effects like gates and lights
 
5. Make the layout look good from both long sides
The view from the “back” is completely different to the view form the front, and worth preserving. So some stone walls need to have both sides modelled, and I must paint both sides of the rails (In the past I have taken more short cuts than my careful writing probably implies!)
 
6. Lightweight for portability
I have a target of an all-up weight of less than 9kg - one kilogram per square foot. So far the “basic railway” of baseboard, track bed and track (but not point motors) is about 5.5 kg. Tortoise motors are heavier than I would like, but I’ve bought six of them. Perhaps I should be trying servos.
 
7. An unfinished model
At small provincial exhibitions, many visitors take an interest in how a layout has been made. I took the fiddle yard to a show last Saturday and turned it upside down quite a few times to show people. So I can set myself an objective to work up the scenics around the processing plant completely, but the leave the quayside area raw, to begin with.
 
- -
 
I suppose, above all else I want to build “my model railway” and resist the temptation to copy someone else’s idea and “make a model of a model”. I am hopeful the layout will be sufficiently different to the original Gum Stump and Snowshoe Railroad to let this happen.
 
- Richard.
 
Edited to correct mathematical guffaw  :scratchhead:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this extremely interesting, as I have a somewhat similar project under construction, in as much as it's a zigzag line connecting micro sized areas, although its on a smaller L shaped baseboard without the 'under and over' bridge.

 

My strategy for separating the scenes is rather less subtle than yours, and will use a fascia divided into windows, as shown in the mock-up below, with a different theme framed by each - industrial, rural, urban.

 

post-26120-0-21064800-1430133884.jpg

 

However the windows do tend to break up the layout into chunks, so it doesn't have the 'flow' of your more holistic approach.

 

Intertwined is the perfect description for your layout. If you manage to preserve or even enhance that aspect of the design with the scenery, it'll be a sure winner.

 

I hope you'll keep us regularly updated on progress.

Alan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

"Intertwined" was suggested by Neil (post number 2) and it is the right word. I've been experimenting with a fairly large tree, looking for a natural way to let it form a view blocker. Layouts, like gardens, look larger when you cannot see everything in one go. If I go this route, I must make sure to model every surface, including those facing the back of the layout. I have made up the basics of a tunnel mouth, a retaining wall and a road over bridge to help me frame the different parts. 

 

I think I have got to rely on the look of the track to hold it all together, and because of this I want to try for three distinct styles of ballast - "the main line", the siding to the mine, and the quayside branch. I'd like the bibloc track top left to get a fourth treatment - essentially, filled in with grass like some modern tramways, but this is quite a short section.

 

Right now, I am building a flat crossing to take the narrow gauge line over one of the mine sidings. In fact I am not merely building one, I'm building the third attempt! I want to get the narrow-gauge line installed next (it is the last of the trackwork), it will be easier to work cliffs and walls around this than the other way round. Also, the NG line will be a tramway across the overbridge front right. I have also got to install nine point motors, but I want a sense of where the cliffs and walls are going so I can find the space to put them! It's all quite iterative, but I have got wiring done to all the track (temporary connections with croc clips to the frogs) and so far I'm happy with the way it runs.

 

- Richard.

 

Veroboard is a good product, but this was taking it beyond its limits:

post-14389-0-22363800-1430140605_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • RMweb Premium

The flat crossing is finally in place, and the narrow gauge line is giving some shape to the area for the processing plant. So here is an update.

 

I am trying to treat this area of the model as a micro layout in its own right. Ore from the mines arrives on the street tramway (bottom right) and is unloaded behind the plant buildings. The outputs from the processing plant are the extracted precious metals (supposedly nickel and palladium) and these will go directly into a van in siding B. The refined ore can go over some kind of gantry into a wagon in siding C. Siding A can hold a tank wagon to replenish the local fuel tanks.

 

At the moment, I'm thinking the street tramway will run along the crown of the road on the bridge. So using copperclad sleepers embedded in the foam board, and code 80 rail on top, the camber of the road can drop a reasonable amount each side of the tramway to the gutter.

 

- Richard.

 

(First posted 7 May, edited to include intended tramway construction).

 

post-14389-0-56915400-1431018200_thumb.jpg

post-14389-0-43822500-1431017785_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this thread and realised that it is virtually identical to a project I've been considering for some time!  Mine would be in P4 though using an 'Enigma' style yard at lower level and an 'Inglenook' at the upper.  The 'surplus' wagons would be interchanged between operating sequences .  Your ideas seem to go beyond this and I'm impressed!  I'd not thought about having a 90 degree exit into a fiddle yard.  I reckon that with small industrial locos and 4 wheel wagons it would work OK in P4. I could even then introduce a Paddy Train or similar as I'm currently building a short rake of old 4 wheel coaches (which, in retrospect, might not like a tight curve!).

 

I'll be keeping an eye on your progress!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Just found this thread and realised that it is virtually identical to a project I've been considering for some time!  Mine would be in P4 though using an 'Enigma' style yard at lower level and an 'Inglenook' at the upper.  The 'surplus' wagons would be interchanged between operating sequences .  Your ideas seem to go beyond this and I'm impressed!  I'd not thought about having a 90 degree exit into a fiddle yard.  I reckon that with small industrial locos and 4 wheel wagons it would work OK in P4. I could even then introduce a Paddy Train or similar as I'm currently building a short rake of old 4 wheel coaches (which, in retrospect, might not like a tight curve!).

 

Thanks for this.

 

I've never tried P4, but I think if I wanted to try the design in EM I would want to make the layout at least a foot longer, and a few inches wider. Essentially, I am building an HO scale layout with a tunnel and bridges sized for 00 trains - I think, in 4mm scale throughout it would look that bit too cramped. I went for 00/HO to retain interoperability with the club layouts; and as a by-product of this, I will get a layout which will handle larger 00 RTR like a Bachmann 2-EPB.

 

My progress on the layout continues but it is a bit mundane at the moment. Yesterday I added the blocks of wood to fix the point motors on to. Next I will install the point motors and wire them up, and wire up the frogs. And then (all of a sudden, so to speak) the model will transition into a workable model railway :-)

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

 

I found this extremely interesting, as I have a somewhat similar project under construction, in as much as it's a zigzag line connecting micro sized areas, although its on a smaller L shaped baseboard without the 'under and over' bridge.
 
My strategy for separating the scenes is rather less subtle than yours, and will use a fascia divided into windows, as shown in the mock-up below, with a different theme framed by each - industrial, rural, urban.
 
However the windows do tend to break up the layout into chunks, so it doesn't have the 'flow' of your more holistic approach.
 
Intertwined is the perfect description for your layout. If you manage to preserve or even enhance that aspect of the design with the scenery, it'll be a sure winner.

 

A nice thing about the 'windows' approach is you can work them up one at a time, and even model three different seasons of the year!

 

I have bought myself a "learning kit" for cliff faces from Woodland Scenics. I have an informal list of features to build: a natural hill, a railway cutting, an avalanche shelter (in place of the tunnel on the first plan, post no. 1) and some rocks jutting out into the sea. This can follow the point motors, but at the moment my enthusiasm is towards the mineral ore processing plant.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this.

 

I've never tried P4, but I think if I wanted to try the design in EM I would want to make the layout at least a foot longer, and a few inches wider. Essentially, I am building an HO scale layout with a tunnel and bridges sized for 00 trains - I think, in 4mm scale throughout it would look that bit too cramped. I went for 00/HO to retain interoperability with the club layouts; and as a by-product of this, I will get a layout which will handle larger 00 RTR like a Bachmann 2-EPB.

 

My progress on the layout continues but it is a bit mundane at the moment. Yesterday I added the blocks of wood to fix the point motors on to. Next I will install the point motors and wire them up, and wire up the frogs. And then (all of a sudden, so to speak) the model will transition into a workable model railway :-)

 

- Richard.

I agree with you over the length in P4.  I was considering an 8' long layout with 2 x 4' boards.  One day I'll get it worked out in Templot - by a mate who has it, not me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...