Planning my first layout

[Sweetling Park]

Hello all, this is my first post so I hope that I am posting this in the right place.

I am new to model railways and am about to start planning my first OO gauge layout.  I wasn't sure how best to go about it, so have purchased a few track plan books to give me some inspiration, along with copy of the AnyRail software to help me with the actual design.  I am having a little bit of trouble with AnyRail and was wondering if anyone would be able to point me in the right direction, please?   I would also be most grateful for some advice on how best to go about a track plan, please.

To give you some background, the space I have available is 2.85m (approx. 9' 4") by 2.22m (approx. 7' 3") in a spare bedroom.  I would like to have continuous loop running with a space in the centre for operating the layout.  On this basis, the baseboards will have a maximum depth of 760mm (approx. 2' 6"), with the exception of one side (wide side) which has a maximum depth of 660mm (approx. 2' 2") in the middle for 1.07m (approx. 3' 6") in width due to space constraints.  There will also be a small lift out section of 500mm by 760mm (approx. 1' 8" by 2' 6") on the opposite side (wide side) to allow access to the operating area.  The remainder will be made up of five baseboards.  The baseboards will be built in modular form to allow for easy removal in the future should the need arise.  The exact dimensions of each baseboard module have also been calculated so that the 12mm birch plywood can be cut to the exact size.  Here is a diagram to give you a better idea of the space I have to play with:

With regards to AnyRail, I have set the drawing area to the drawing area to the space I have available (2830mm by 2220mm), which I thought would be a good starting point.  I have created a layer to place the baseboard surfaces on, so that I can separate them from the actual track plan.  I would like to create the baseboard surfaces with an exact size and place them next to each other with a flush fit.  It may be something that I am doing wrong, but when I use Insert > Add surface and draw the surface I am not able to get the exact size or flush fit, even though I try to tweak it after drawing the approximate shape.  I then tried going to Insert, specifying the width and height and clicking on Add rectangle which seems to work, but I have to enable Settings > Snap to grid to get the surfaces to align properly.  Could someone tell me if I am doing this right, please?

I wish to use Peco Streamline Code 100 track and have purchased a set of Tracksetta templates and Peco six foot gauges to help when I lay the track.  I have experimented with placing flexi track pieces on the work area, but some of the curves appear to be too tight which I understand is to do with the "Minimum radius" values.  I am guessing that I should set the values to the minimum size Tracksettas that I wish to use but I may be wrong.  Therefore, I would be most grateful if someone could tell me how best to approach this, please.  For reference, currently my longest rolling stock will be Class 80x, Class 390 Pendolino and Mk5/5a coaches.

 

With regards to the track plan and overall design, I would like to create a modern image layout and be relatively prototypical, but not tying myself to any particular era to allow for some creativity.  I would like to have a minimum of two mainlines and an adjacent heritage line which has a connection to the mainlines, so that the steam/diesel locomotives can venture out on rail tours.  If space allows then adding a third line for slow traffic or occasional loops would be nice, or even four mainlines (two fast, two slow), along with a siding or two for thunderbird locomotives.  The scenery will be countryside so I would like to have fields with animals and a cottage or similar, along with a tunnel, a bridge or two and a level crossing.  I would like to have a main station, a smaller station/halt, depot facilities, sidings and something for the heritage railway.  I would also like to cant the track if possible and in the future to be able to add signals.  I am not able to drop the baseboard levels, but would consider raising the track slightly to cater for underbridges or failing that settle for overbridges.  I appreciate that it might not all fit, but they are the ideas that I currently have.  For reference, I will be using DCC and wish to use slow action point motors mounted underneath the baseboards.

I was wondering if anyone might be able to offer some advice on how to best to approach the design, please?  I appreciate that it may be a case of trial and error, but don’t wish to start going down an unfamiliar route and ending up in a bit of a tangle.

I am sorry if this has been a long read, but thank you in advance for your time and help with this.

[Harlequin]

Hi, Welcome to RMweb!

 

Don't get too hung up on baseboards at this early stage. Design the layout first and then design the baseboards to suit. You will probably find that the baseboards don't need to be as wide as currently shown all the way around, making access easier and giving you a more comfortable operating well.

 

If you make the track curves take the "racing line" around the corners they should be generous enough for modern OO stock and to not upset AnyRail. I.e. start curving before the corner, sweep near the "apex" and gradually straighten out again.

 

[ITG]

Re Anyrail, I’m pretty much self taught so what follows may not be the only/best way but it worked for me.

 

I didn’t attempt to draw individual baseboards, but as you have done, set the overall room (surface) size as a single entity. I then drew baseboard edges using the line tool in a different colour. This makes it much easier to move/change baseboard sizes, either to suit an evolving track plan or to avoid track features such as under board point motors etc. I used the same approach for drawing in battens later in the process so as to balance /adapt the location of point motors and battens.

 

I used Streamline 100, but in what is a relatively tight space for 00 (my room is 3.5m x 2m, with an inward opening doorway) I found it useful to use Peco set track curves in the corners, both on Anyrail and on the layout itself. They come in 4 or 5 different radii, so are able to be used in various settings, and fully compatible. And tbh, it’s easier in such tight spaces rather than bending flexi to what will be mostly similar radii. I used generally 3rd (505mm) or 4th (571.5mm) radius with occasional 2nd (438mm) radius in tight but hidden corners.

 

You do really need to doodle on paper before moving on to Anyrail, which is great for more accurately (though maybe not quite 100%) working out what fits where. To design the layout track plan from scratch on Anyrail is cumbersome, so get an idea(s) first, either from various online or book track plan articles, or adapt someone else’s ideas.

Good luck.

[Smardale]

Do you have any favourite track plans from the reading material you've purchased?

[DCB]

Following on from Harlequin's wise words , That operating well looks far too snug to me, I would make it at least 3ft wide and curve the ends to match your tightest curve radius this will make reaching the corners if not easy then possible.  There is room for several parallel loops around which trains can circulate and fast trains overtaking slow ones is fun to watch but once you have more trains than running lines you start to need loops or a fiddleyard so you can ring the changes.  You could go old style like the Triang book of track plans 1970 and have a fiddle yard masquerading as a station, but  that's a bit frowned upon.   You could probably replicate "Crewlisle" in your space, but that is very advanced.  There are very few heritage / mainline railway shared stations, Aviemore and Bodmin Parkway are the only two I know. Both have short form HSTs on the main line, both have their usual heritage locos available RTR in 00 Bodmin has Clay trains, Aviemore long freights and freightliners, Both have sleeping car trains.

I would put the station over the lift out hatch and have the window side for fiddle yard or loops. maybe with heritage terminus in front and sidings hidden by a low backscene so to be hidden when sitting down.  No body else would but I have a station on a lift out and it gives very little trouble, also very many station platforms are on bridges of one sort or another.

not a recommendartion as sch

[Sweetling Park]

Thank you very much @Harlequin, @ITG, @Smardale and @DCB for kindly taking the time to help me.  I very much appreciate it.

 

 

23 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi, Welcome to RMweb!

 

Don't get too hung up on baseboards at this early stage. Design the layout first and then design the baseboards to suit. You will probably find that the baseboards don't need to be as wide as currently shown all the way around, making access easier and giving you a more comfortable operating well.

 

If you make the track curves take the "racing line" around the corners they should be generous enough for modern OO stock and to not upset AnyRail. I.e. start curving before the corner, sweep near the "apex" and gradually straighten out again.

 

 

Thank you.  I had considered trying to design the layout first, but thought that by working out baseboard sizes it would help give me the most surface space and that I could design around that, given the limited space that I have available.  I fully appreciate where you are coming from though, as the current operating well is approximately 2' 3" by 4' 3" which may be a bit snug.

 

Regarding the track curves, I forgot to mention that I was considering adding fillets in the corners to allow a smoother track.  I was considering starting the curve with a larger radius Tracksetta, then using a smaller radius to tighten the curve before ending with a larger radius, so that the curve is smooth at entry and exit.  Thank you for the tip on the "racing line", I will have a play around with it.

 

 

22 hours ago, ITG said:

Re Anyrail, I’m pretty much self taught so what follows may not be the only/best way but it worked for me.

 

I didn’t attempt to draw individual baseboards, but as you have done, set the overall room (surface) size as a single entity. I then drew baseboard edges using the line tool in a different colour. This makes it much easier to move/change baseboard sizes, either to suit an evolving track plan or to avoid track features such as under board point motors etc. I used the same approach for drawing in battens later in the process so as to balance /adapt the location of point motors and battens.

 

I used Streamline 100, but in what is a relatively tight space for 00 (my room is 3.5m x 2m, with an inward opening doorway) I found it useful to use Peco set track curves in the corners, both on Anyrail and on the layout itself. They come in 4 or 5 different radii, so are able to be used in various settings, and fully compatible. And tbh, it’s easier in such tight spaces rather than bending flexi to what will be mostly similar radii. I used generally 3rd (505mm) or 4th (571.5mm) radius with occasional 2nd (438mm) radius in tight but hidden corners.

 

You do really need to doodle on paper before moving on to Anyrail, which is great for more accurately (though maybe not quite 100%) working out what fits where. To design the layout track plan from scratch on Anyrail is cumbersome, so get an idea(s) first, either from various online or book track plan articles, or adapt someone else’s ideas.

Good luck.

 

Thank you for your advice.  I didn't realise that you could mix set track with Streamline, so that is something for me to consider on the curves.  My preference would be to use 3rd radius and above to allow the curves to be more gentle.

 

I originally did a doodle on paper which wasn't to scale so thought AnyRail would help, but it seems a bit fiddly to begin with.  I am going to go back to paper and doodle some ideas before trying AnyRail again.

 

 

20 hours ago, Smardale said:

Do you have any favourite track plans from the reading material you've purchased?

 

I don't have any favourites at present, but have taken some ideas from the plans that I have seen.  One idea I liked was sweeping curves but I will need to see if that will work with the space I have.

 

 

8 hours ago, DCB said:

Following on from Harlequin's wise words , That operating well looks far too snug to me, I would make it at least 3ft wide and curve the ends to match your tightest curve radius this will make reaching the corners if not easy then possible.  There is room for several parallel loops around which trains can circulate and fast trains overtaking slow ones is fun to watch but once you have more trains than running lines you start to need loops or a fiddleyard so you can ring the changes.  You could go old style like the Triang book of track plans 1970 and have a fiddle yard masquerading as a station, but  that's a bit frowned upon.   You could probably replicate "Crewlisle" in your space, but that is very advanced.  There are very few heritage / mainline railway shared stations, Aviemore and Bodmin Parkway are the only two I know. Both have short form HSTs on the main line, both have their usual heritage locos available RTR in 00 Bodmin has Clay trains, Aviemore long freights and freightliners, Both have sleeping car trains.

I would put the station over the lift out hatch and have the window side for fiddle yard or loops. maybe with heritage terminus in front and sidings hidden by a low backscene so to be hidden when sitting down.  No body else would but I have a station on a lift out and it gives very little trouble, also very many station platforms are on bridges of one sort or another.

not a recommendartion as sch

 

Thank you for your advice and kindly supplying a drawing.  I realised after posting that I forgot to mention about a fiddle yard, as I need somewhere to store some of the rolling stock.  I had considered adding a scenic yard or carriage sidings and utilising that as the fiddle yard, but your suggestion of hiding it behind scenery is something that I will consider.  Your drawing has also given me some other things to consider.  I wasn't sure how may loops that I could fit in, but it seems that there will be room for more than two/three.  I also hadn't considered an end-to-end heritage railway as I envisaged it as a continuous loop, but the former is something that I will also consider as it will probably be more prototypical.  I like the idea of curved platforms as that could give me more to play with than simple straight platforms.

 

 

Thank you once again for your help.  Your responses have given me some things to consider and I have a couple of new ideas in mind.  I will go away and draw them on paper and will give you an update soon.

[RobinofLoxley]

I think you have to be very experienced at layout building in order to create a useful doodle freehand. Design software is your friend because it doesnt lie about space available.

 

In this kind of space, you will need to employ setrack curves. They are a big help to maintain gauge - track separation - when you have several lines parallel. If you try to lay them with flexitrack you will most likely finish with kinks. Track plans are OK as mostly they are tested and known to fit in the dimensions allowed.

 

Really clever design is needed to get the most out of the space, too. Nearly square spaces are very tricky in my opinion because its hard to fit platforms - if they have to be curved, the clearances needed for carriages to get round result in absurd gaps.

[Lowcliff]

For Anyrail recommendations I would have a look on Youtube its all on there

 

[DCB]

Anyrail is great for point formations.  Anyrail is great for Set Track. Set track out of the box is pretty useless for "Serious" layouts as it lacks versatility,

Anyrail is frustrating for flexi track as its difficcult to draw flexi to constant radius or to keep track centres constant

I use it for checking point formations, some just don't work, C.J Freezer often drew a curved diamond crossing which has not been available from Peco EVER   I drew my doodle in Anyrail. Doodle took 30 minutes, Anyrail almost 3 hours and it's still not right but when you add bits it keeps changing, hugely frustrating.

I will load the various iterations, the crossover from Heritage to main line lower right was a nightmare and needed a set track curved point and a 2ft rad right hand.  Otherwise visible points are streamline mainly curved, some 2ft, and hidden mainly set track curved.  Should work with modern RTR, not too clever with "Scale" steam locos .   

Pics   183 original doodle in Faststone Image Viewer

188 sceenshot of Anyrail     188a, Anyrail with platforms and backscene added in Faststone Image Viewer 188b 188a with Heritage tracks where i really wanted them  (in Red) but Anyrail would have needed another half hour to alter 

See pics

Edited May 1, 2022 by DCB

[teaky]

3 hours ago, DCB said:

Anyrail is frustrating for flexi track as its difficcult to draw flexi to constant radius or to keep track centres constant

I use it for checking point formations, some just don't work, C.J Freezer often drew a curved diamond crossing which has not been available from Peco EVER   I drew my doodle in Anyrail. Doodle took 30 minutes, Anyrail almost 3 hours and it's still not right but when you add bits it keeps changing, hugely frustrating.

 

Does this help?

 

"Anyrail is frustrating for flexi track as its difficcult to draw flexi to constant radius or to keep track centres constant"

Drag a piece of flexi track to where you want it.  Click on it once to select it.  Click on curve flex up at the top and enter the angle and radius values you require.

There is an add parallel flex option that allows you to set the distance (track centres).

 

"... when you add bits it keeps changing ..."

Select the piece(s) of track and glue them before connecting anything to the ends.  Not perfect since you need to position the curved crossover first and work around it but at least it won't be affected each time you attach another piece of track to the ends.

 

[ITG]

If using a combination of set track and flexi, whether in Anyrail or indeed with actual track on the board, one thing to remember and adapt is that the points/turnouts in Streamline will automatically give a track centre distance of 50mm (eg in a crossover) , whereas the radii of set track curves are made at more than that (64mm IIRC?). It’s easy enough to adapt, as using combination of curves or adding a small piece of straight track can work to reduce the larger gap down. Maybe if such set track curves are hidden it doesn’t matter too much.

 

I should add, I agree with what Teaky has stated, that there are tools in Anyrail to largely overcome the issues quoted by DCB.

I have previously used Zoom to help someone with Anyrail, so PM me if I can help.

[RobinofLoxley]

Taking note of the opening post, I have had a little go at a layout proposal. I used anyrail and mixed setrack and flexi (as usual) - no attempt at fine tuning or even straightening some of the wonky bits of flexi. No point unless its going somewhere. Its a basic roundy with the heritage line and its loco storage facility based on P3 (working from inside being P1). There is no runaround at the heritage halt I foresee trains being backed up there, not unheard of in Heritage operations, then the loco is correctly placed for access to the main line. I would lay the Heritage line going uphill to the halt, gradient can be gentle, say 1 in 50, would give a decent height difference at the halt.

 

There is space for more track - the red arrows show the 90cm reach limit, although only one corner has track right to the edge. Anyrail encourages more track to be put in, not always a good thing for the scenic aspects which although not drawn, there is plenty of scope. The long run on the left hand side gives a panorama.

 

Reducing the track gives a more practical operating space.

 

The acess section probably isnt exactly in the right place; however I take the view that the track plan comes before the baseboards but keep it simple on a lift out section. The freight sidings are accessed through a slip which allows trains to switch tracks. its probably not completely prototypical.

[Sweetling Park]

Thank you to those who have kindly provided me with further assistance.

 

 

On 30/04/2022 at 21:13, Lowcliff said:

For Anyrail recommendations I would have a look on Youtube its all on there

 

On 01/05/2022 at 07:46, teaky said:

 

Does this help?

 

"Anyrail is frustrating for flexi track as its difficcult to draw flexi to constant radius or to keep track centres constant"

Drag a piece of flexi track to where you want it.  Click on it once to select it.  Click on curve flex up at the top and enter the angle and radius values you require.

There is an add parallel flex option that allows you to set the distance (track centres).

 

"... when you add bits it keeps changing ..."

Select the piece(s) of track and glue them before connecting anything to the ends.  Not perfect since you need to position the curved crossover first and work around it but at least it won't be affected each time you attach another piece of track to the ends.

 

 

Thank you @Lowcliff and @teaky for your help.  I previously looked at the documentation and some videos, but somehow forgot about those options.  I have had a little play with them and it certainly makes it easier when drawing flexi track.

 

 

Thank you @ITG for the information and kind offer of assistance with AnyRail over Zoom.  I really appreciate it.

 

I would also like to thank @DCB and @RobinofLoxley for spending the time to produce proposed layouts for me.  It is most kind of you and I am certainly considering your proposals.

 

[BourneRhino]

I've been following the above posts with interest. Like Sweetling Park, I'm planning my first (and probably only at my age) Model Railway. I've planned a layout using WinRail X-3. That's fits with me because the resultant layout drawing looks more like a 2D engineering drawing to me and the whole set up works more like AutoCad LT. But I'd now like to move to being able to include buildings and scenery and generate 3D imagery. I've looked at both SCARM and AnyRail and  I've exceeded the parameters of the freeware versions without trying.

 

My proposed layout is a "roundy-roundy" centred on main line junction stations with a small goods yard and small MPD. IT will have a lots of flexible tack and a branch line raised over a fiddle yard. The whole will be in an area 5.760m x 3.445m. I don't want to waste money on buying a licence for either of these APPS, so I'm looking for some advice. Should I choose Scarm or AnyRail or is there something better I should consider?

[DavidB-AU]

On 16/05/2022 at 03:01, BourneRhino said:

I don't want to waste money on buying a licence for either of these APPS, so I'm looking for some advice. Should I choose Scarm or AnyRail or is there something better I should consider?

 

Have a look at XTrkCad which is also free.

 

Cheers
David

[Harlequin]

The cost of a license for one of those packages will be a tiny fraction of the cost of the actual model railway and having a properly worked out plan could save you a lot of time and money in the long run.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2022 by Harlequin

[ITG]

5 hours ago, Harlequin said:

The cost of a license for one of those packages will be a tiny fraction of the cost of the actual model railway and having a properly worked out plan could save you a lot of time and money in the long run.

 

 

Totally agree. I invested in Anyrail very early on in my planning stages, and tbh, it’s as useful for things you get wrong as it is for those that are right! By that I mean, Its much easier to use a programme such as Anyrail to work out (and rule in/out) radii and platform/siding lengths etc, than it is on a board with pieces of track. It’s also very useful for printing and scribbling on, for such as wiring routes, track feeds, below board battens etc.

[Sweetling Park]

I would like to apologise for the lack of updates since my last post, as I have been busy at work driving my full size trains.  I have also been preparing the room for the layout, which needed to be done before the baseboards go up.  I am hoping to progress with track planning soon, including considering the proposals above, and will provide an update as soon as I can.

[Sweetling Park]

On 15/05/2022 at 18:01, BourneRhino said:

I've been following the above posts with interest. Like Sweetling Park, I'm planning my first (and probably only at my age) Model Railway.

 

...

 

Should I choose Scarm or AnyRail or is there something better I should consider?

 

I originally considered designing the layout using good old pencil and paper, as well as purchasing some pieces of track and playing around with them on the baseboards.  However, after seeing a number of videos on YouTube where modellers used AnyRail to assist with planning, I decided that it would be worth looking at software as it seemed to have advantages.  Whilst I looked at SCARM, I decided that AnyRail would be the best one for me for a number of reasons, including printing the track plan in full scale to see if it will actually fit.  It also has the benefit of user contributed objects such as signals and the Metcalfe card products, so you can add them in scale form to see if it will all fit.

 

I agree with @Harlequin and @ITG's comments above.  Whilst you have the cost of the licence to use the software, it does bring advantages and is about the price of a point/crossing.

 

I hope this helps.

[ITG]

37 minutes ago, Sweetling Park said:

 

I originally considered designing the layout using good old pencil and paper, as well as purchasing some pieces of track and playing around with them on the baseboards.  However, after seeing a number of videos on YouTube where modellers used AnyRail to assist with planning, I decided that it would be worth looking at software as it seemed to have advantages.  Whilst I looked at SCARM, I decided that AnyRail would be the best one for me for a number of reasons, including printing the track plan in full scale to see if it will actually fit.  It also has the benefit of user contributed objects such as signals and the Metcalfe card products, so you can add them in scale form to see if it will all fit.

 

I agree with @Harlequin and @ITG's comments above.  Whilst you have the cost of the licence to use the software, it does bring advantages and is about the price of a point/crossing.

 

I hope this helps.

Good to hear things are evolving, even if only in a conceptual state. One aspect I would add, is that even when using Anyrail, it’s best to start with an outline plan (be that paper sketch, or in your head, or copying someone else’s idea) before actually trying to link Anyrail pieces together. What Anyrail does best IMHO is to allow you to test those ideas, scope out space limitations and fine tune.

[Sweetling Park]

I would like to apologise for the lack of updates since my last post, as I had to put the project on hold due to commitments and circumstances outside of the railway room.  I am hoping to restart the project in the New Year, but in the meantime here is an overview of what has happened so far.

 

Following the work to prepare the railway room, the baseboard modules were built and are now in place ready for the next stages.  A solution for the backscene support structures (link to thread) was identified and is partially implemented, as the wood for the backscene boards is still to be obtained.

 

With regards to the track design, I have taken on board the comments and suggestions in this thread, as well as sketch some ideas on paper.  However, I will need to revisit them all and try to draw something in AnyRail.

 

I am hoping to post another update once the project has resumed.

[Jeff Smith]

You say the modules are in place, does that mean they are all screwed together?  This is fine for ensuring track alignment across joins but makes wiring and installing point motors very hard if you have to crawl underneath.

[Sweetling Park]

On 25/12/2022 at 02:45, Jeff Smith said:

You say the modules are in place, does that mean they are all screwed together?  This is fine for ensuring track alignment across joins but makes wiring and installing point motors very hard if you have to crawl underneath.

Yes, the modules are now bolted together.  I appreciate your comments about wiring and installing point motors and that had crossed my mind, but due to space and time constraints at the build stage I wouldn't have been able to do it the other way around.  I am currently considering how best to route the DCC and accessory buses under the baseboards, with my current thinking of routing them around the underside edge or middle, but I'm not sure if that is the best/most practical solution.

[Jeff Smith]

An early decision is whether to rely on the rail joiners for continuity or install droppers to bridge each joiner or install a bus with one or two droppers from each length of rail.  With with DCC you should probably make the whole layout live, particularly with sound, as against using points to isolate sidings.  The disadvantage is that you can drive into an incorrectly set point and the system will short out.

[Sweetling Park]

Thank you for your comments.  My initial thoughts were to make the entire layout live, with droppers strategically placed to supply the power without reliance on the fishplates.  However, my more recent thinking is that it would be better to add droppers to every piece of track to ensure that everything is powered.