My next layout...and a question.

[AndrueC]

So it'll be a year maybe two before I start it - I've not finished Circularium yet and I might even be moving house if I can find what I want. But looking at other layouts I'm now rethinking a major part of it.

 

As with my current layout it's N scale but this will run around the walls of a room with a liftable section at bottom left. If I move house I hope to simplify that area as at present there seems a lot of track to have on a liftable flap.

 

In case it's not obvious from this image the outer loop is raised with the lower track going underneath it at the right and a long sweeping curve coming down from it top left (I'm really looking forward to modelling that).

 

I've got a couple of small stations but I'm beginning to think that I'd like a larger station - one with a more complex throat, Perhaps a 'minor line/major line interchange'. And also a proper road system with a town rather than purely rail system as I have here. But in order to do all that I've got to get rid of my staging yards, or at least reduce them and I'm not sure what to replace them with. I don't dislike the yards but when it comes down to it they are basically dead space without much scope for scenery.

 

I like having variety in my rolling stock and I don't want the hassle of manually re-railing stuff so what are the other alternatives to a staging yard? I think keeping some of them is necessary but if I could come up with some 'other source' of alternative rolling stock it would be nice. Absolutely ideal would be the ability to have trains go 'off stage' to be replaced with different trains - maybe looking like a connection to a different area.

[RobinofLoxley]

This all looks a bit odd to me, if you dont mind me saying so.

 

Firstly im trying to understand if your intention is to take the old layout to bits the day after you finish it in order to build a new one?

 

Then I'm trying to understand the track plan. I understand that you have a thing for trains going round and round but that plan is very top heavy on train storage, and seems light on other features. If I suggest something that cant work because of things being on different levels, I apologise.

 

You are right about the lift off section being very complicated and I would be worried about building that more than anything, as it stands.

 

The thing is that rather than have so many different storage areas they could be combined provided you dont mind having the stock stacked in much longer track runs that can hold perhaps three complete trains depending on stock.  That frees up space elsewhere. Then the other option, which im sure you must have considered, is a helix down to storage, which certainly takes it off-scene at layout level.

 

As far as stations go, I am building three and all are 4 platform and already its very complex just to have pointwork allowing parallel trains in and out, with all platforms available in and out as well. Plus some loco resting points, refuelling, sheds, etc. So I havnt done them all that way.

 

Flexibilily of era is possible, there are quite a few examples in layout topics where modellers plan to run from different livery eras (more significant than time except when it comes to scenery). You would think a lot of scenery is generic but it clearly isnt and if you want a layout that is realistic in some way, consistent scenics might be the biggest headache.  

[DCB]

I don't understand it either.   Or Circularium.  That looks very  "Swiss" single line through alpine meadows with 2020 UK stock and Pannier tanks.  Overall roofs over storage sidings.  I can't relate it to UK prototype.   

As regards general principles I would suggest keeping the station simple and consider putting the platforms or part of them on the lifting section, that way you can keep the point work off the lifting section and the platforms can brace the structure.    Otherwise if you want UK prototype track layouts  check out Harlequin s work

[AndrueC]

12 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Firstly im trying to understand if your intention is to take the old layout to bits the day after you finish it in order to build a new one?

 

My current layout is something of a learning exercise. It was only ever intended to allow me to dip my toes into this hobby and see if I wanted to make it part of my retirement. I've decided that I do so at some point, probably in a year or two I'll be wanting to move on to what I hope to be my 'retirement layout'. Something bigger that can be built to a higher quality and that will take longer. So in that sense yes, the current layout will be dismantled. I'll recover as much of it as I can (the raw materials anyway) and I'll begin construction on a new layout.

 

12 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Then I'm trying to understand the track plan. I understand that you have a thing for trains going round and round but that plan is very top heavy on train storage, and seems light on other features. If I suggest something that cant work because of things being on different levels, I apologise.

 

No, I agree, that's exactly why I'm asking. As I've built my current layout my ideas have evolved as I thought they would and now I realise that there's just too much track here. My current layout has 8 sidings and I think that's ample especially since a station can act as storage.

 

12 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

The thing is that rather than have so many different storage areas they could be combined provided you dont mind having the stock stacked in much longer track runs that can hold perhaps three complete trains depending on stock.

The problem with that is that one thing I dislike about my current layout is that it's not 'switch on and play' because I have to reverse trains out of the staging yards which is a bit tedious. An important feature of this layout has to be that those trains that are visible are ready to run just by changing a few turnouts. However the idea of a helix to allow me to add variety or to have trains going 'elsewhere' is an interesting one. I can at least look into it and try and set aside some space.

[AndrueC]

11 hours ago, DCB said:

I don't understand it either.   Or Circularium.  That looks very  "Swiss" single line through alpine meadows with 2020 UK stock and Pannier tanks.  Overall roofs over storage sidings.  I can't relate it to UK prototype.

 

Who said it's supposed to be prototypical? You build what you want and I'll build what I want. I'm pretty sure that's the whole point of a hobby. Circularium has turned out to be exactly what I wanted it to be. But I can see the end game and I'm planning for what I build after that.

 

11 hours ago, DCB said:

As regards general principles I would suggest keeping the station simple and consider putting the platforms or part of them on the lifting section, that way you can keep the point work off the lifting section and the platforms can brace the structure.

Thanks.

11 hours ago, DCB said:

 Otherwise if you want UK prototype track layouts  check out Harlequin s work

Am I missing something here? Is there a particular reason why you think I'm trying to build a prototypical layout? I just want to build 'a model railway'. Locos, rolling stock and some scenery. It's just something to keep me interested and entertained when I'm retired and have more free time on my hands.

Edited January 8, 2022 by AndrueC

[Harlequin]

6 hours ago, AndrueC said:

 

Who said it's supposed to be prototypical? You build what you want and I'll build what I want. I'm pretty sure that's the whole point of a hobby. Circularium has turned out to be exactly what I wanted it to be. But I can see the end game and I'm planning for what I build after that.

 

Thanks.

Am I missing something here? Is there a particular reason why you think I'm trying to build a prototypical layout? I just want to build 'a model railway'. Locos, rolling stock and some scenery. It's just something to keep me interested and entertained when I'm retired and have more free time on my hands.

 

It's very unusual to make a layout that doesn't make some sort of attempt at being prototypical so DCB was making a perfectly reasonable assumption.

 

No-one can really sensibly comment on your layout design when it doesn't follow the expected conventions.

 

Out of interest, why are you intent on avoiding something more realistic? Wouldn't it add to the interest and the entertainment?

 

P.S. In the thread title you said there was a question but I don't think you've actually asked a question yet. There is a question after all.

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by Harlequin

[Aire Head]

1 hour ago, AndrueC said:

Who said it's supposed to be prototypical? You build what you want and I'll build what I want. I'm pretty sure that's the whole point of a hobby. Circularium has turned out to be exactly what I wanted it to be. But I can see the end game and I'm planning for what I build after that

 

It helps if people know exactly what you want to achieve from any potential layout when it comes to advising on design.

 

No one will be thinking any less of you if you have no desire to follow prototype practice and if you desire is to create a rabbit warren of lines which you can watch your trains meander around.

 

Your original post isn't clear in this regards which is why people will default to advising on what people usually ask for in this section of the forum which is creating realistic looking and prototypical designs of model railways.

 

In order to advise you as best as possible I would like to know what you want from any potential model.

 

Obviously having plenty of stuff moving all over is of an appeal to you but it helps if we know other information like.

 

Do you have any intention of shunting about l? How long are the trains you want to run? How many do you want moving at the same time

 

Are there any particular features you wish to incorporate? 1 station? Multiple stations, locomotive stabling? 

 

 On scene storage or hidden sidings? How much stock do you intend to have on the layout?

 

All this information is helpful for people who want to help you create something you will hopefully love.

Edited January 8, 2022 by Aire Head

[AndrueC]

I'm sorry if my post wasn't clear enough but @RobinofLoxley managed to answer it without any difficulty. 'I like having variety in my rolling stock and I don't want the hassle of manually re-railing stuff so what are the other alternatives to a staging yard?'

 

That's really all I wanted to know. Robin correctly deduced that I was bothered by the amount of space set aside for a yard and he provided an alternative. He also helped provide some information on the issue of station complexity that I'd mentioned.

 

All in all he gave me some things to ponder and I'm actually reviewing the whole concept of 'roundy-roundy'. I'm considering an alternative design now centred around a station and its approaches with two hidden staging yards that can be used for trains to enter/exit the scene. The main reason I wanted roundy-roundy was to be able to watch trains running without me having to control them but since I intend the next layout to be computer controlled an end to end might work anyway and it removes the headache of a lift-out section.

[5BarVT]

3 hours ago, AndrueC said:

but since I intend the next layout to be computer controlled an end to end might work anyway

With something like Traincontroller or iTrain an end to end with multiple unit stock will work.  (I’ve done it.).  And you do get the (almost) continuous running.  With double track and care on the ‘programming’ you might be able to have at least one train moving at any point in time.

I’m hoping to be able to do the same with trains that need to have an engine swap at each end but I haven’t got that far yet.

Paul.

[RobinofLoxley]

When I reply to these very open ended type of questions - which are framed to attract the widest expertise here anyway - I try to avoid being presciptive even if I have a solution in mind. It's better if the original poster works out the answer whatever it is. After doing consultancy in industry for 20 years I never frame a direct suggestion (well almost never ) as they are usually rejected. 

[RobinofLoxley]

By the way Andrue what was the scale on your layout drawing - I guess 1 square was 10cm?

[DCB]

I think I understand,  Its very different to most layouts. Pretty much every layout is there so folk can see trains run.  Not every one, some folk build layouts with minimal opportunity to see trains move but enjoy the building phase. 

The open Staging yard is a modern waste of space popularised by DCC where you need to know which locomotive is on which track, not too easy if you have 100 plus.    Older layouts like mine hid them under scenery or under other tracks and used DC where what ever train you set the points for set off.  You can use helix's or spirals to spiral trains down low enough so you can get a good view of the trains.  I only have 6" but if you have 18" 450mm clearance you can see what you're doing.

There are vertical storage modules, "Nelevarors" with multiple shelves with track which lift up and down and store about 8 or more complete trains up to about 6 feet long.  These tower above the layout, or you could make a close cousin the train elevator which lowers whole trains from the layout level to a storage level.  Much quicker than a spiral/ Helix but DIY not available off the shelf.  Rev Peter Denny designed one for "Buckingham" around 1970, his was OO but with lighter shorter trains N gauge ones are a doddle, you can start with a 2.4M 2X1" timber as a track base, which would allow 15 coach trains in N.

If you take the storage to another level then the visible layout needs to suit your requirements.  At present despite lots of track in intersecting loops  you can only run a maximum of three trains on the layout simultaneously without lots of switch flicking and point changing due to a pinch point on the lift out and everything looks like it has to go the same way. You could do better with DC and computer control, but it will need some very sophisticated programming.

You may find the same issue I had with my unconventional loft layout, which were irreconcilable conflicts.   I gave up and abandoned it.    

 

[AndrueC]

10 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

By the way Andrue what was the scale on your layout drawing - I guess 1 square was 10cm?

Yes, it is although the final size will depend on the room which is still uncertain.

 

The main problem with an end to end is how to turn trains around. Options I can think of at the moment:

 

* Turning circles at each end. Possible but turning circles + hidden staying yard(s) takes up a lot of space.

 

* Hidden yard(s) with single track across the board gap so trains don't have to turn around.

 

* Hidden yards with turntable and run around track. Requires uncoupling. Difficult to automate.

 

* Two linked helixes for turning - sounds expensive.

 

 

I'm currently favouring the second option. Two hidden staging yards at each end of the board with a narrow bridge across the gap where the door is. The main board area will have three areas.

 

* One yard connects directly into a station/goods yard.

* The other side of the station exits into open country with cuttings.  This area exits into the second yard.

* A double line that runs between two small stations, one above each yard serviced by two DMUs. The DMU line has to get down to the main station though and since it is elevated at both ends that could be tricky. I think the best I'll be able to do is drop the line half way down and have a station that covers two levels.

Edited January 9, 2022 by AndrueC

[ITG]

23 hours ago, AndrueC said:

The problem with that is that one thing I dislike about my current layout is that it's not 'switch on and play' because I have to reverse trains out of the staging yards which is a bit tedious.

Not sure I understand this, as if that plan as shown is your current layout, are they not all double ended loops, meaning that trains go in/out of either end? Why do they have to reverse?

 

17 hours ago, AndrueC said:

I'm actually reviewing the whole concept of 'roundy-roundy'.

To me, it’s a big step to ditch the idea of roundy-roundy if you like watching trains running, and are used to it on your present layout. You can always run trains end-to-end on a roundy-roundy, but you cannot run circling trains on an end-to-end.

 

1 hour ago, AndrueC said:

The main problem with an end to end is how to turn trains around. Options I can think of at the moment:

 

* Turning circles at each end. Possible but turning circles + hidden staying yard(s) takes up a lot of space.

Then it’s not really an end-to-end, is it? 

[RobinofLoxley]

Only steam stock requires true turning via a turntable or a reversing loop - these can be integrated into the layout.  Otherwise it's just runaround.  A triangular shunt is another way. Uncoupling isn't problematic (I hope as I'm installing the magnets) - if you are uncoupling in a station it should be at the same location most of the time.

 

Helices arent really for turning stock as far as I know, although they could be for that, as i understand it they function either as a transition between genuine 2-level layouts or as a means of storing stock, in large amounts, on a different level to the operating layout. 

 

So the layout plan above is based on 6M by 4M, quite large, considering especially its N scale.

Edited January 9, 2022 by RobinofLoxley

[AndrueC]

5 hours ago, ITG said:

Not sure I understand this, as if that plan as shown is your current layout, are they not all double ended loops, meaning that trains go in/out of either end? Why do they have to reverse?

No, that plan was my proposed layout, now under reconsideration

[AndrueC]

3 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

So the layout plan above is based on 6M by 4M, quite large, considering especially its N scale.

Yes. My current layout is 2.1x1.5m (the size of a double bed). My next layout will go around the sides of the room instead. One thing I definitely like doing is running long trains. I had hoped to get an extra coach or wagon on my trains by making layout bigger but currently it looks like being about the same with a maximum train length of 850mm.

 

I had an idea this afternoon where I have conceptually three separate lines.

 

* The DMU (this really is separate).

* Passenger trains.

* Freight trains.

 

If each staging yard is split into 2 passenger, 2 freight rather than a single block of four I think I can make them slightly longer. Would be nice if each siding could be 914mm, the length of a single run of Streamline track.

 

We shall see. Today was golf day so I haven't had time to give serious thought to the layout.

[Rivercider]

51 minutes ago, AndrueC said:

Yes. My current layout is 2.1x1.5m (the size of a double bed). My next layout will go around the sides of the room instead. One thing I definitely like doing is running long trains. I had hoped to get an extra coach or wagon on my trains by making layout bigger but currently it looks like being about the same with a maximum train length of 850mm.

 

I had an idea this afternoon where I have conceptually three separate lines.

 

* The DMU (this really is separate).

* Passenger trains.

* Freight trains.

 

If each staging yard is split into 2 passenger, 2 freight rather than a single block of four I think I can make them slightly longer. Would be nice if each siding could be 914mm, the length of a single run of Streamline track.

 

We shall see. Today was golf day so I haven't had time to give serious thought to the layout.

If you have scenic fiddle yards it will work if the freight and passenger trains are separated. Just treat two yards as carriage sidings, and two as freight storage yards, Then there might be no need to turn stock if you duplicate the train types. You could have (say) one express passenger, one semi-fast passenger and one local passenger train in each set of sidings. Similarly with the freight yards one set of sidings could have a loaded coal (or stone) train, the other set an empty coal train, this replicates a real life traffic flow from coalfield to customer.

 

cheers

[AndrueC]

So here's my current thoughts. It's a bit rough and I haven't put the goods yard in (basically because I've no idea what it should look like and I've done enough for today, lol).

 

The DMU line is no longer elevated and is on the inside. The main line with two hidden staging yards is on the outside with a section of track connecting them. This will be a lift-out section of some kind.

 

Operationally what I'm hoping for is a kind of 'dance'. The station/goods yard and the two staging areas are positions at which mainline trains can stop. At each 'move' of the dance a train goes between one of these positions (or possibly two trains move at the same time). At the staging yards a random train is chosen to move next thus giving the illusion of trains entering/exiting the area. The area to the right of the base board will be open country with an embankment. The area around the station will be town/industrial.

 

The DMU line terminates at a village station at either end. Two DMUs are shuttling back and forth along their line, passing each other at the main station.

 

It sounds feasible but I'm wondering:

 

* I'd like to have bi-directional mainline running and I suppose this arrangement will allow it with trains passing in the station. So some trains run one way, others run the other. Does that seem reasonable?

* Can anyone point me to a goods yard plan? It needs to be one I can adapt to be 'run through' but I've no idea what one would look like at the moment.

Edited January 9, 2022 by AndrueC

[AndrueC]

So as regards the goods yard I haven't found much inspiration so I'll ask a different question. How are the following types of freight wagons loaded/unloaded?

 

* Double bogie Cargowaggon - can't currently even see how these would open. Side doors that split in the middle somehow? That implies a platform.

* Bullet wagon - presumably a pipe on a gantry?

* Coal wagon - presumably loaded via a chute but what about unloading?

 

Once I know that I can design three sidings, one for each type of load. That ought to give enough scope for an interesting yard.

[woodenhead]

3 minutes ago, AndrueC said:

So as regards the goods yard I haven't found much inspiration so I'll ask a different question. How are the following types of freight wagons loaded/unloaded?

 

* Double bogie Cargowaggon - can't currently even see how these would open. Side doors that split in the middle somehow? That implies a platform.

* Bullet wagon - presumably a pipe on a gantry?

* Coal wagon - presumably loaded via a chute but what about unloading?

 

Once I know that I can design three sidings, one for each type of load. That ought to give enough scope for an interesting yard.

Cargowaggons - palletised loads - forklifts

Silver bullets - top loaded, bottom oulet to a pipe I imagine.

Coal wagon - depends on the sort - side doors on basic 4 wheel minerals for hand unloading and an end door for tipping, bottom discharge for hoppers inc HEA/HAA.

 

A lot of modern stone wagons are unloaded using a grab as well as some being bottom discharge

[AndrueC]

Thanks for that. Hopefully I can re-purpose my current stock of pallet stuff when the time comes because I did not enjoy painting and assembling the last lot. I love N scale but sometimes it can get really fiddly. Painting a barrel is bad enough but sacks are incredibly annoying.

 

Anyway I think I can knock up a plan for goods yard now. I'll post it for consideration when done. You've all been very helpful.

[AndrueC]

So the latest final draft, lol.

 

There are three goods yards for each type of freight. I'm not sure about platform width or configuration but I've assumed that most foot traffic would want to cross to/from DMU to main line so that has a large island platform.

[ITG]

No link between branch and mainline for occasional through train running?

Why are all 3 yards loops with no sidings?

Where are locos stored/ fuelled etc?

[AndrueC]

10 hours ago, ITG said:

No link between branch and mainline for occasional through train running?

I could do that, wouldn't be difficult. It would make sense for the DMUs to be able to get somewhere for refuelling/servicing.

10 hours ago, ITG said:

Why are all 3 yards loops with no sidings?

Currently because the plan is about a constantly running layout but you've made me think. Given that there are large areas with no track (over the top of the yards) I could have a few sidings for rolling stock that is currently 'not running'. It would extend the variety.

10 hours ago, ITG said:

Where are locos stored/ fuelled etc?

..and perhaps I could have a siding/refuelling area to the left of the main station, extending over that yard.

 

Looking at the plan this morning there's a lot of space along the bottom and right side. It feels like I could put something there. I wonder - I'd like to have a diamond crossing somewhere in memory of my late Dad. Would it look silly if I moved the bottom station up and had a quarry line that went from bottom left to top right crossing the branch line to get to the main? The quarry line could then be another shuttle that takes wagons to a separate unloading siding above the left siding? Then install connection between the left branch station and the refuelling area/main line.

 

I don't object to a single shuttle that requires a bit of uncoupling when I want to run it.

Edited January 11, 2022 by AndrueC