Revisiting track plans 8 x 4

[RobinofLoxley]

3 hours ago, barney121e said:

 

Ok, so have managed to get a plan on anyrail from Chimer's suggestion. Still open to other thoughts though.

Quick question, normally Flexi is spaced differently to settrack but am I right to keep the settrack spacing all round?

Not quite. Spacing using Peco Streamline points is different to 00 setrack from any maker. But flexi is flexi, whatever items it is combined with. In your case, you will use it to maintain setrack spacing.

[barney121e]

53 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Not quite. Spacing using Peco Streamline points is different to 00 setrack from any maker. But flexi is flexi, whatever items it is combined with. In your case, you will use it to maintain setrack spacing.

Thanks, was my thinking but thought i'd check.

 

[Chimer]

Yes, the crossovers dictate set-track spacing and it would look weird if you just closed it up through the station area.

 

I think you need to stick a quarter straight in between the ST-235 and ST-240 top right, to avoid the risk of trains on the two circuits fouling one another on the S-curves into the fiddle yard.

 

And well done for changing the crossover top right back to the way Phil had it - the way I did it would be operationally hopeless. But I've now noticed I've also made an error at the other end of the fiddle yard.  Will rescrub tomorrow!!

[barney121e]

28 minutes ago, Chimer said:

Yes, the crossovers dictate set-track spacing and it would look weird if you just closed it up through the station area.

 

I think you need to stick a quarter straight in between the ST-235 and ST-240 top right, to avoid the risk of trains on the two circuits fouling one another on the S-curves into the fiddle yard.

 

And well done for changing the crossover top right back to the way Phil had it - the way I did it would be operationally hopeless. But I've now noticed I've also made an error at the other end of the fiddle yard.  Will rescrub tomorrow!!

What is the error?

[Chimer]

10 hours ago, barney121e said:

What is the error?

 

Right-hand fiddle yard crosssover in wrong place for what it's supposed to achieve!!  Working on it .....

[Chimer]

OK, here's another go with both fiddle yard crossovers doing what they're supposed to do, i.e. allow trains to change from one circuit to the other and change direction (having shifted locos and brake vans by hand where necessary).

 

 

I have left the set-track discontinuities showing (red splodges).  Using flexitrack for the FY straights, the problems there go away - the ones bottom right might be closable just by wiggling the set-track components, but a couple of tiny bits of flexi might be needed.

 

As before, green curves are 3rd radius, blue 2nd.

 

Apologies for the earlier errors!

[DCB]

56 minutes ago, Chimer said:

OK, here's another go with both fiddle yard crossovers doing what they're supposed to do, i.e. allow trains to change from one circuit to the other and change direction (having shifted locos and brake vans by hand where necessary).

 

 

I have left the set-track discontinuities showing (red splodges).  Using flexitrack for the FY straights, the problems there go away - the ones bottom right might be closable just by wiggling the set-track components, but a couple of tiny bits of flexi might be needed.

 

As before, green curves are 3rd radius, blue 2nd.

 

Apologies for the earlier errors!

The red splodges on the right hand side looked odd, surely the outer set track curve should follow the inner around with a constant spacing.   I bit of a head scratch and it looks like the top right crossover geometry L/H to R/H is throwing the track spacing wide.    That L/H to R/H crossover geometry is  always an issue with set track.   My MO would be to shorten the R/H point a few mm on the straight road, but that's advanced bodgery.  I prefer to tweak or shorten set track for small layouts but in this case I would swing the outer track wide at the lower right, possibly a set track short(est)  straight would sort it out.

[barney121e]

1 hour ago, DCB said:

The red splodges on the right hand side looked odd, surely the outer set track curve should follow the inner around with a constant spacing.   I bit of a head scratch and it looks like the top right crossover geometry L/H to R/H is throwing the track spacing wide.    That L/H to R/H crossover geometry is  always an issue with set track.   My MO would be to shorten the R/H point a few mm on the straight road, but that's advanced bodgery.  I prefer to tweak or shorten set track for small layouts but in this case I would swing the outer track wide at the lower right, possibly a set track short(est)  straight would sort it out.

 

 

3 hours ago, Chimer said:

OK, here's another go with both fiddle yard crossovers doing what they're supposed to do, i.e. allow trains to change from one circuit to the other and change direction (having shifted locos and brake vans by hand where necessary).

 

 

I have left the set-track discontinuities showing (red splodges).  Using flexitrack for the FY straights, the problems there go away - the ones bottom right might be closable just by wiggling the set-track components, but a couple of tiny bits of flexi might be needed.

 

As before, green curves are 3rd radius, blue 2nd.

 

Apologies for the earlier errors!

I had a play, and only space i have is where the red circle is. My only other query i have is the line above the blue circle. Trains on the inside line will run anti clockwise so how would a train access this line?

Edited July 14, 2022 by barney121e

[Harlequin]

5 hours ago, Chimer said:

OK, here's another go with both fiddle yard crossovers doing what they're supposed to do, i.e. allow trains to change from one circuit to the other and change direction (having shifted locos and brake vans by hand where necessary).

 

 

I have left the set-track discontinuities showing (red splodges).  Using flexitrack for the FY straights, the problems there go away - the ones bottom right might be closable just by wiggling the set-track components, but a couple of tiny bits of flexi might be needed.

 

As before, green curves are 3rd radius, blue 2nd.

 

Apologies for the earlier errors!

Hi Chris,

The placement of the station crossover makes the platforms shorter and has a reverse curve in that might make shunting unreliable. Can you get half of it into the end curve? And the same with the small trailing siding?

Is it possible to make the passing loop in the outer circuit longer?

I was thinking of making the goods yard a bit more interesting by having two sidings fed from a setrack Y point so that they don't diverge too much.

BTW: I had the platform tracks running straight and angled so the platforms are a bit easier to build, so the track work is all setrack (apart from the siding) and so that the platform had decent width along the edge of the layout. With the curved platforms I think the outer platform might be quite skinny for half its length - but it's hard to tell.

Edited July 14, 2022 by Harlequin

[DCB]

2 hours ago, barney121e said:

I had a play, and only space i have is where the red circle is. My only other query i have is the line above the blue circle. Trains on the inside line will run anti clockwise so how would a train access this line?

There is enough slop in the set track rail joiners to close the red circle gap.  It's more a software issue than a real issue. software has the joints exactly 180 degrees while real life they can be 177 to 183 degrees  before it starts looking like a dog leg. The "blue circle" inner dead end hidden siding can be accessed from the outer circuit and trains can reverse there and run round the inner. Otherwise trains have to appear from the tunnel mouth as they reverse in or out.     Looks good, workable.  You could do extra sidings and revised crossovers as per Phils suggestion, add a couple of stubs maybe,  lengthen the blue circle road  up to the tunnel mouth etc  but it looks to me like the basics are there now.

[barney121e]

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Hi Chris,

The placement of the station crossover makes the platforms shorter and has a reverse curve in that might make shunting unreliable. Can you get half of it into the end curve? And the same with the small trailing siding?

Is it possible to make the passing loop in the outer circuit longer?

I was thinking of making the goods yard a bit more interesting by having two sidings fed from a setrack Y point so that they don't diverge too much.

BTW: I had the platform tracks running straight and angled so the platforms are a bit easier to build, so the track work is all setrack (apart from the siding) and so that the platform had decent width along the edge of the layout. With the curved platforms I think the outer platform might be quite skinny for half its length - but it's hard to tell.

 

29 minutes ago, DCB said:

There is enough slop in the set track rail joiners to close the red circle gap.  It's more a software issue than a real issue. software has the joints exactly 180 degrees while real life they can be 177 to 183 degrees  before it starts looking like a dog leg. The "blue circle" inner dead end hidden siding can be accessed from the outer circuit and trains can reverse there and run round the inner. Otherwise trains have to appear from the tunnel mouth as they reverse in or out.     Looks good, workable.  You could do extra sidings and revised crossovers as per Phils suggestion, add a couple of stubs maybe,  lengthen the blue circle road  up to the tunnel mouth etc  but it looks to me like the basics are there now.

I had a flash of inspiration from another plan i was thinking about in regard to the fiddle yard. Not sure if it improves things or not.

[Chimer]

On 14/07/2022 at 13:54, Harlequin said:

Hi Chris,

The placement of the station crossover makes the platforms shorter and has a reverse curve in that might make shunting unreliable. Can you get half of it into the end curve? And the same with the small trailing siding?

Is it possible to make the passing loop in the outer circuit longer?

I was thinking of making the goods yard a bit more interesting by having two sidings fed from a setrack Y point so that they don't diverge too much.

BTW: I had the platform tracks running straight and angled so the platforms are a bit easier to build, so the track work is all setrack (apart from the siding) and so that the platform had decent width along the edge of the layout. With the curved platforms I think the outer platform might be quite skinny for half its length - but it's hard to tell.

 

Phil, working on it.  I did the crossover that way to try to avoid set-track discontinuities which occur if you take it off the curve - but as Barney's now  accepting the need to bodge things a bit I'll have another look.  What angle did you have your platform tracks at?  Much less than 11.25 degrees by the look of it ....

 

[Harlequin]

4°

 

That was just from placing one 3rd radius circle near the top left and one near bottom right. With real template parts you might be able to get more.

[barney121e]

5 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

Phil, working on it.  I did the crossover that way to try to avoid set-track discontinuities which occur if you take it off the curve - but as Barney's now  accepting the need to bodge things a bit I'll have another look.  What angle did you have your platform tracks at?  Much less than 11.25 degrees by the look of it ....

 

Thanks for working on sorting out the plan.  Nothing too bodgee ideally.

[Chimer]

Here's another version.

 

 

As before, blue standard/R2 set-track, green R3 set-track, brown flexi (although most of straights could be done with set-track straights if preferred).  Pink for quarter and half straights and curves which make the geometry work (more or less).  Brown curves bottom left are R2 and R3 but need to be cut down from standard curves.

 

I've added a couple of stub sidings which might be useful if you particularly want to keep your locos on the tracks, but they'll be a bit fiddly operationally - the hand of god (assisted by locolifts) can probably do a better job.

 

I have another version which retains the gentle curve through the station area, but I'll leave at this for now!

 

Cheers, Chris

[Flying Pig]

44 minutes ago, Chimer said:

I have another version which retains the gentle curve through the station area, but I'll leave at this for now!

 

Or mke the bottom right curve with R3/R4?

[Harlequin]

9 hours ago, Chimer said:

Here's another version.

 

 

As before, blue standard/R2 set-track, green R3 set-track, brown flexi (although most of straights could be done with set-track straights if preferred).  Pink for quarter and half straights and curves which make the geometry work (more or less).  Brown curves bottom left are R2 and R3 but need to be cut down from standard curves.

 

I've added a couple of stub sidings which might be useful if you particularly want to keep your locos on the tracks, but they'll be a bit fiddly operationally - the hand of god (assisted by locolifts) can probably do a better job.

 

I have another version which retains the gentle curve through the station area, but I'll leave at this for now!

 

Cheers, Chris

 

That's lovely, very practical. Thanks Chris!

 

Barney: You could insert a very small straight between the Y points and the connection to the main line so that the inner platform can be a bit wider at that end.

 

 

8 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Or make the bottom right curve with R3/R4?

Yes, good call. It took me a few mins to realise what you meant (duh!) so to be clear, Barney: the two bits of track circled by Chris in red could be cut from R3 and R4 pieces so that there's a more gentle transition between the curve and the straight.

 

Edited July 16, 2022 by Harlequin

[Flying Pig]

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Yes, good call. It took me a few mins to realise what you meant (duh!) so to be clear, Barney: the two bits of track circled by Chris in red could be cut from R3 and R4 pieces so that there's a more gentle transition between the curve and the straight.

 

 

No, I was wondering whether the entire 90 degrees could be made with R3 and R4, which might possibly line up with the curve on the right to make a simple parallel bottom straight.  Or not, but I think it's worth a try in the planning software.

 

Of course it would lose the transition curve, but if the goal is a layout easily built out of sectional track it might be preferable.  There's no transition at the other end anyway.

[Chimer]

7 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

No, I was wondering whether the entire 90 degrees could be made with R3 and R4, which might possibly line up with the curve on the right to make a simple parallel bottom straight.  Or not, but I think it's worth a try in the planning software.

 

Of course it would lose the transition curve, but if the goal is a layout easily built out of sectional track it might be preferable.  There's no transition at the other end anyway.

 

I think Phil and I are both gently encouraging Barney to break out of "parallel to the edges" syndrome 🙂  (hence Phil's interpretation of your original comment), and give a bit of room for a station building bottom leftish).

[barney121e]

1 hour ago, Chimer said:

 

I think Phil and I are both gently encouraging Barney to break out of "parallel to the edges" syndrome 🙂  (hence Phil's interpretation of your original comment), and give a bit of room for a station building bottom leftish).

Can i just check that the thought is the track starts to gently curve from the blue to the red circles? The red line are just over extended flexi.

[barney121e]

13 hours ago, Harlequin said:

 

That's lovely, very practical. Thanks Chris!

 

Barney: You could insert a very small straight between the Y points and the connection to the main line so that the inner platform can be a bit wider at that end.

 

 

Yes, good call. It took me a few mins to realise what you meant (duh!) so to be clear, Barney: the two bits of track circled by Chris in red could be cut from R3 and R4 pieces so that there's a more gentle transition between the curve and the straight.

 

What if i use st238 on both curves bottom left, and then flexi ?

Edited July 16, 2022 by barney121e

[Chimer]

2 hours ago, barney121e said:

What if i use st238 on both curves bottom left, and then flexi ?

 

You really want the two curves to be of different radii (2.625" different) to maintain the track separation.  You could use the ST-238 for one, and do the other in flexi, but if you're up to that sort of radius you might as well use flexi for the whole thing anyway.

[Harlequin]

Any of those solutions are fine if they maintain the separation within some leeway and they give you enough of an outer platform. That's up to you to decide.

 

But it's interesting that XtrakCad and AnyRail seem to end up with different offsets to the bottom edge of the baseboard. (And is there another tool involved here?) So in some plans it looks like there's loads of room for a platform while in others it looks very skinny.

 

[barney121e]

9 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Any of those solutions are fine if they maintain the separation within some leeway and they give you enough of an outer platform. That's up to you to decide.

 

But it's interesting that XtrakCad and AnyRail seem to end up with different offsets to the bottom edge of the baseboard. (And is there another tool involved here?) So in some plans it looks like there's loads of room for a platform while in others it looks very skinny.

 

Did a quick measure and bottom right is 75mm from edge but will lay out plan tonight and try and get exact figure 

[Chimer]

14 hours ago, barney121e said:

Can i just check that the thought is the track starts to gently curve from the blue to the red circles? The red line are just over extended flexi.

 

 

That's very similar to the "other version" I mentioned I'd done, a few posts back.  I actually prefer it to the plan I posted there, but it might be a bit trickier to get the two tracks nicely aligned and parallel throughout.  Here's that version, with the measuring grid showing this time ....