A tentative return to 00 gauge

[Mr Grumpy]

After many years of 16mm live steam, then 0 gauge, mainly kit building, my attention was drawn back to the great outdoors with 1:20.3 narrow gauge. I have enjoyed building the layout but find boredom has set in during rainy days and long evenings.

To reduce the boredom I have taken the plunge and decided to build a 00 gauge layout of 11' x 7'6" in the garage.

I have hundreds of photos from the early 80's to the 90's and I will be trying to recreate this era. I will be running 33/1s with 4TC stock, thumpers and class 47 and 50 NSE stock. Freight will be 'passing' trains with a 59, possibly 56's and engineering trains with dutch 37's and 33's. Control will be DCC and Tortoise point motors as used on my 0 gauge layout.

As for the layout, I have adapted a C.J.Freezer layout from Track Plans, TP2. (I think this edition is around 16 years old).

So...to my query...

I have noticed some modellers have experienced problems when using Peco code 75 curved points. My layout will have 3 in a row on the station throat and a couple in the hidden sidings. I honestly can't remember the last time I experienced a derailment on any of my layouts, indoors or outside, so I'm a tad concerned about using the points. The points will have a decent radius curve feeding in and out. I really can't fit large radius points in to the station throat, if I can't use the curved points, I will need to start again. 

I would be interested to hear if the issues have been resolved or if the problems were down to track laying?

Thanks!

 

Edit:

I forgot to include the layout plan....

 

 

Edited January 23, 2021 by Mr Grumpy

[Chimer]

I used two to form a crossover in a trial layout I built a few years ago and don't recall any derailment problems there.  And I do recall plenty of derailments elsewhere ......

 

I won't hesitate to use them if the "last great project" ever comes to fruition.

 

And I do like the plan, but wonder if you have enough storage sidings (open and hidden) for all the freight services you talk about?

 

Cheers, Chris

[Pete the Elaner]

Due to may layout's design, most of my pointwork had to be curved Peco code 75.

I occasionally get derailments, but these are usually with bogie/pony trucks on steam locos & it is invariable an adjustment issue of the locos, not the track.

I did find that when soldering the blades/stock rails, these soldering points are a little too close to the end of the rail, causing it to become detached from the end chair. A drop of araldite held in place temporarily with a piece of card was enough to hold it in place.

[Mr Grumpy]

Thanks for sharing your experience with using these points. It has made me feel a tad more confident to use them. 
The 33/1 will be propelling the 4TC set through the points on exiting the bay, and depending on which end the motor bogie is on the thumper, it could be propelling its coach through them too.

The sidings, to the right of the station will be parallel and probably serve some kind of distribution centre, or ‘Red Star’ parcels.

The Foster Yeoman and civil engineers trains will just circle the layout without any on screen shunting. I really want to run double headed 33/0s on the Southampton Freightliner too. 
In theory, the trains will circle several times, use the return loop to return as ‘empties’ then removed and different trains placed in the loops.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Mr Grumpy

[Ben Alder]

Couldn't have done my layout in the space I had without them - I used Electrofrogs and any derailments were, as above, an occasional leading loco bogie which would be tweaked in to obedience. I bonded the stock and switch rails for better conductivity, a job easier done before laying them.

 

[KingEdwardII]

I have several curved Peco points on my layout and I've never had any problems with them.

 

The only trouble I had recently was with a diamond crossing which caused some hassle until I realized that it wasn't properly level and needed extra fixings - so I now check all my pointwork to make sure there are no high or low parts which might cause trouble.

 

Mike.

[Mr Grumpy]

I will definitely be using electofrog points  Also, I bonded all the rails on my previous 0 gauge layout, I may need stronger specs this time round :-)

[DCB]

I think you could add some hidden sidings fairly easily which would help storage.

Modern OO RTR does not like handling.  Steam is worse Diseasles andy Lectrics but stiil shed detail bits on an all too regular basis.

A run round in the station would help with 50s etc non push pull locos on loco hauled trains.

See Pic

If you intend to do a lot of propelling I would avoid tension lock couplers if starting from scratch, Kadees have to be the smart option for 2020 but I use Peco, and propel 22 wagon trains over 2ft radius points regularly with no hassle, Tension locks need constant fiddling and fettling as no two seem to be same.  The gaps between vehicles are also absolutely ridiculous on some tension locks

[Zomboid]

You could probably fit a couple of dead end sidings inside the return loop, for the DEMU and TC sets. You should try to avoid crane shunting though, you'll spend quite a long time not operating trains and risking damage to your rolling stock.

 

Looks like a nice CJF-esque plan though, plenty of fun to be had there.

 

Edit - Now @DavidCBroad's image is showing I see I haven't added much. Though I would also try to put a dead end facing the other way on the return loop, just to add variety to how those back & forth trains run.

 

Edited January 24, 2021 by Zomboid

[Keith Addenbrooke]

I’ve been doing some reading around the idea of ‘achievable layout design’ - I think this scores highly on that front.  There may be a few tweaks (as suggested already), but basically I’d say: “Go for it!”  Keith.

Edited January 24, 2021 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Harlequin]

That space in the reversing loop might need to be left open for someone to get in to access much of the left hand side of the layout (whether they have a small or large waist ). It sort of depends how the layout is fitted into the garage, i.e. where the walls are.

 

David's loco release crossover is a definite improvement but could be closer to the buffer stops.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

Very useful advice guys...thanks!

I’ll investigate adding the two sidings inside the return loop, but it will be a squeeze as I need the space to reach the sidings storage loops for maintenance etc. I foresee a snug fit! 
I also agree with adding the release crossover, I can’t think why I left it out in the first place. Once I have dabbled with the plan, I’ll pop it on for further comment. 
Kadees will be my weapon of choice, I have noticed the tension lock problems with differing heights and designs. I used Kadees with a ‘step’ on some of my 1:20.3 stock to overcome coupling height disparity and they work very well.

[ITG]

I too pondered how to fit in a reverse loop in a similar context. I decided to make the loop a wider radius, comparable to running parallel on the left hand side of your plan, towards the station. I then used a removable girder bridge to get back to the other side of the layout, ie the reverse loop runs closer to 90 degrees across from top to bottom. In your case, that would mean the ‘village’ area would become an access void, and it would eradicate the ‘clearance for large waist’ area marked on David Broad’s version. Plus, access to the suggested storage sidings would be easier, and could be closer to parallel to the storage loops.

This approach does obviously alter the scenic context somewhat. And I haven’t checked radii possibilities.

Ian

[RobinofLoxley]

I'm going to be relying on the same point spec, but in code 100, in the same configuration, in my new layout. Compared to setrack where you have 25 and 33 degree curves, these points have only 6 and 12. I will be amazed if they lead to significant problems, more than any other complex part of the layout. No other way to do it anyway.

 

How did Cyril leave that station crossover out? Is it like the old meccano plans with the deliberate mistakes in?

[Harlequin]

Streamline curved turnout angles are 8° and 20° giving a net divergence of 12° at 2in separation - the Streamline standard.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

Here's my attempt at adding storage for the 4TC and thumper, hopefully leaving enough room for me to occasionally squeeze in!

Sorry for the screen shot....I'm out of paper to print it out.

 

[Zomboid]

If you're using Anyrail (which it seems like), you can export the design to various formats, including pictures. It's on the menu below save/ save as etc.

[Mr Grumpy]

Hi Zomboid,

I’m using the free version of Railmodeller  Express at present. I shall see if I can export to photos :-)

[TonyMay]

My thought is that the station (4 platforms) is disproportionate to the single-track line, it looks like you're trying to maximise the station size by having lots of platforms, but I don;t think this is a good idea.

 

I'd also consider ditching the reversing loop entirely, as this simplifies things and allows you to have more storage.  Just have clockwise and anti-clockwise trains.

[woodenhead]

6 hours ago, TonyMay said:

My thought is that the station (4 platforms) is disproportionate to the single-track line, it looks like you're trying to maximise the station size by having lots of platforms, but I don;t think this is a good idea.

 

I'd also consider ditching the reversing loop entirely, as this simplifies things and allows you to have more storage.  Just have clockwise and anti-clockwise trains.

I disagree, this looks like it is designed on play value rather than any prototype so Rule #1 applies.

 

The reversing loop allows for the 47/50 loco hauled trains to return without lifting stock, or one + an other can go round the main loop.

 

Adding the two extra sidings for the Thumper and 4TC is a good idea too, I reckon you need an NSE 117 or a 159 as well to add to the options.

 

It's a little bit Borchester too which I like.

Edited January 25, 2021 by woodenhead

[Zomboid]

I think I would try and get the right hand side to look like a double track formation, but if that doesn't work then I'd just embrace the plan for what it is - a model railway that's designed to be fun to operate.

[Mr Grumpy]

I have added the crossover and ‘suggested’ the station platform isn’t serving the main line. If I used this option, I would raise the station by 15mm just to give a bit of separation and add a wall along the platform edge.

The return loop is a necessity to return loco hauled stock in to the terminus so will be staying. 
This is going to be a long term build, mainly in the Autumn/Winter season when I can’t play outside :-)

[Zomboid]

What are those two sidings off the inside of the loop for? They seem a bit of a steam age feature, or somewhere to put a tamper or similar.

 

Would actually be quite a good place to park a couple of ballast wagons I suppose.

 

I'd flip the loco release crossover round so the LH trains can use the longer platform.

[Harlequin]

If the main station is raised and if we assume that the sequence of turnouts into the parcels hub is level (I think that's the only sensible option - and there's no room to change gradient between them) then you don't have very much length in which to change levels.

 

The parcels hub might be a pain to shunt because both run round loops require the use of the main line and that means suspending main line running.

 

How does the layout fit in the garage? Which sides are bounded by walls and is the lifting flap against an outward opening door?

 

[Nearholmer]

Well Mr Grumpy, looks like you are building my coarse-0 layout in 00!

 

Mine even began with a curved platform on the main, which I decided I didn't like.

 

I’ve had exactly the same conundrum at the station throat as you have (which I resolved by shortening the platform to avoid running-round interfering with circulation on the main), and have a short single-track section, before splitting again, and that bit still doesn’t feel right. 
 

Once I get some spare time (home-school during lockdown is keeping me very busy indeed!), I intend to change it so that it forms something more like a spiral, with two parallel single tracks, which will feel a lot better.

 

Very rough sketches:

 

 

Also, I’ve put the two tracks with run-round at the back, which makes shunting the spur-siding in the corner (your parcel depot, a dairy on mine) much easier than shunting from a bay.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Nearholmer