old newbie - TT120: Code and rolling stock compatibility question

[Tonyo262]

Hola, I last built a layout 15 years ago, so while I'm not exactly new to the hobby (I make other scale models too) I am, like many of my generation, easily confused by terminology and the increasing complexity of the products and choices. 

 

There's so many parallels with my scale modelling past-time in terms of product quality choice, techniques and, of course, cost (railway modelling is eye wateringly expensive, and nothing in the styrene world comes close unless you're into 1/32 scale Lancasters). Anyway, I think TT120 is a smashing idea, and will hopefully allow the hobby to fit better with modern living. To my eye, it 'looks right'.

 

So track codes: I see Hornby are diving in, while Peco has announced some track and basic structures. All of which means some serious capital investment and more to come. Given that Hornby are the early adopters and have announced motive power and rolling stock, (here comes daft question 1) does anyone know if their stock will run on the Peco Code 55 track ok? Given that if you're going to go to the trouble of having a gauge which is accurate to the prototype, then the rail profile and sleeper spacing proportion should be as close as possible too, right? I'm presuming that H will design their wheel flanges for their Code 80 rails...

 

Secondly (DQ 2) TT120 track plans: Are there any full size available?

 

And (DQ 3) does anyone know what the scale reduction might be to drop a OO plan to TT120 for photocopying and scratch-building structures? I have a small end to end layout in mind based on a long lost terminus at Port Carlisle, and want to adapt some North British structures for this admittedly 'what if' layout. The small diorama is based on the real hamlet of Port Carlisle, which was originally a canal basin with jetty and wharf to take coal and cotton from Liverpool via barges the 12 miles to Carlisle. The canal didn't last long as rail came along, they filled in the canal and put a branch line on the route with the basin and lock silting up. They are still there as is the trackbed but all signs of canal hardware and rail buildings are gone. Here's my idea, it's a fantasy idea that the branch survived and is sliding into gentle decay and inevitable closure. It will run a couple of Era 5/6 Type 1 BR diesels (if anyone makes them in TT120 that is!) and mixed goods as pasenger services are long gone. It's a rough draft, so all comments are welcome. 

[BachelorBoy]

5 hours ago, Tonyo262 said:

And (DQ 3) does anyone know what the scale reduction might be to drop a OO plan to TT120 for photocopying and scratch-building structures?

76.2/120*100 = 63.5%

[Tonyo262]

2 hours ago, BachelorBoy said:

76.2/120*100 = 63.5%

Brill, thankyou. 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

9 hours ago, Tonyo262 said:

Hola, I last built a layout 15 years ago, so while I'm not exactly new to the hobby (I make other scale models too) I am, like many of my generation, easily confused by terminology and the increasing complexity of the products and choices. 

 

There's so many parallels with my scale modelling past-time in terms of product quality choice, techniques and, of course, cost (railway modelling is eye wateringly expensive, and nothing in the styrene world comes close unless you're into 1/32 scale Lancasters). Anyway, I think TT120 is a smashing idea, and will hopefully allow the hobby to fit better with modern living. To my eye, it 'looks right'.

 

So track codes: I see Hornby are diving in, while Peco has announced some track and basic structures. All of which means some serious capital investment and more to come. Given that Hornby are the early adopters and have announced motive power and rolling stock, (here comes daft question 1) does anyone know if their stock will run on the Peco Code 55 track ok? Given that if you're going to go to the trouble of having a gauge which is accurate to the prototype, then the rail profile and sleeper spacing proportion should be as close as possible too, right? I'm presuming that H will design their wheel flanges for their Code 80 rails...

 

Secondly (DQ 2) TT120 track plans: Are there any full size available?

 

And (DQ 3) does anyone know what the scale reduction might be to drop a OO plan to TT120 for photocopying and scratch-building structures? I have a small end to end layout in mind based on a long lost terminus at Port Carlisle, and want to adapt some North British structures for this admittedly 'what if' layout. The small diorama is based on the real hamlet of Port Carlisle, which was originally a canal basin with jetty and wharf to take coal and cotton from Liverpool via barges the 12 miles to Carlisle. The canal didn't last long as rail came along, they filled in the canal and put a branch line on the route with the basin and lock silting up. They are still there as is the trackbed but all signs of canal hardware and rail buildings are gone. Here's my idea, it's a fantasy idea that the branch survived and is sliding into gentle decay and inevitable closure. It will run a couple of Era 5/6 Type 1 BR diesels (if anyone makes them in TT120 that is!) and mixed goods as pasenger services are long gone. It's a rough draft, so all comments are welcome. 

Lovely drawings and a really nice idea.  To answer questions 1 and 2 (not at all daft, incidentally):

 

DQ2: Not yet as far as I know, but if you use Anyrail track planning software (incl. the free version with the 50 piece limit), the track libraries do include TT:120 track so you could see how it works.  There are several track options if you include the existing European brands (eg: Tillig).  However…

 

DQ1:  It’s too soon to know if / how easily Hornby products will run on other track as we’ve not yet seen production versions of the Hornby offering.  Personally I bought some Peco track and points as a small, up-front investment in TT:120 when it was announced.  I know the Tillig Continental TT I had at the time seemed to be OK on Peco track.

 

Guess my suggestion now would be to do the paper exercises, sign up for the Hornby TT:120 Club (one year’s free membership if you sign up before end of Jan 2023 - and there is a “Rest of World” option, although that excl. Australia due to an existing distribution deal there) and either keep an eye out for the first reports when product becomes available.  Just a thought, Keith.

 

Edited November 11, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Hobby]

People have tested modern TT (Tillig, etc.,) on Peco and it runs OK, as Hornby are supposedly using the same standards there's shouldn't be any issues.

[Tonyo262]

13 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Lovely drawings and a really nice idea.  To answer questions 1 and 2 (not at all daft, incidentally):

 

DQ2: Not yet as far as I know, but if you use Anyrail track planning software (incl. the free version with the 50 piece limit), the track libraries do include TT:120 track so you could see how it works.  There are several track options if you include the existing European brands (eg: Tillig).  However…

 

DQ1:  It’s too soon to know if / how easily Hornby products will run on other track as we’ve not yet seen production versions of the Hornby offering.  Personally I bought some Peco track and points as a small, up-front investment in TT:120 when it was announced.  I know the Tillig Continental TT I had at the time seemed to be OK on Peco track.

 

Guess my suggestion now would be to do the paper exercises, sign up for the Hornby TT:120 Club (one year’s free membership if you sign up before end of Jan 2023 - and there is a “Rest of World” option, although that excl. Australia due to an existing distribution deal there) and either keep an eye out for the first reports when product becomes available.  Just a thought, Keith.

 

Thank you Keith, I think your advice to crack on with the track plans and refine the design, and keep an eye out for developments is a good plan. Thanks for the mention of Anyrail, I’ll check this out, and for the kind words about my sketches. Take care.

[Tonyo262]

21 hours ago, Tonyo262 said:

Thank you Keith, I think your advice to crack on with the track plans and refine the design, and keep an eye out for developments is a good plan. Thanks for the mention of Anyrail, I’ll check this out, and for the kind words about my sketches. Take care.

Seems Anyrail is PC only so I’ll go off and hunt for a Mac friendly app, thanks for getting me thinking though! Go well. 

[jmh67]

On 11/11/2022 at 05:40, BachelorBoy said:

76.2/120*100 = 63.5%

Note, however, that the track geometry may be different, in particular the angles and (scaled) radii of the turnouts, so that you may not achieve a true-to-scale reduction in size.

[SGF]

Looking at the radii etc. for the Hornby track, it appears to be identical to the Tillig track system.  As it is all made to the NEM standards, it should all work together.  Don't forget, Hornby also own Arnold, so it would be silly for them not to make a compatable track system.  All the standards are availablt to download  on the MOROP website.

[NCB]

On 10/11/2022 at 22:46, Tonyo262 said:

Hola, I last built a layout 15 years ago, so while I'm not exactly new to the hobby (I make other scale models too) I am, like many of my generation, easily confused by terminology and the increasing complexity of the products and choices. 

 

There's so many parallels with my scale modelling past-time in terms of product quality choice, techniques and, of course, cost (railway modelling is eye wateringly expensive, and nothing in the styrene world comes close unless you're into 1/32 scale Lancasters). Anyway, I think TT120 is a smashing idea, and will hopefully allow the hobby to fit better with modern living. To my eye, it 'looks right'.

 

So track codes: I see Hornby are diving in, while Peco has announced some track and basic structures. All of which means some serious capital investment and more to come. Given that Hornby are the early adopters and have announced motive power and rolling stock, (here comes daft question 1) does anyone know if their stock will run on the Peco Code 55 track ok? Given that if you're going to go to the trouble of having a gauge which is accurate to the prototype, then the rail profile and sleeper spacing proportion should be as close as possible too, right? I'm presuming that H will design their wheel flanges for their Code 80 rails...

 

Secondly (DQ 2) TT120 track plans: Are there any full size available?

 

And (DQ 3) does anyone know what the scale reduction might be to drop a OO plan to TT120 for photocopying and scratch-building structures? I have a small end to end layout in mind based on a long lost terminus at Port Carlisle, and want to adapt some North British structures for this admittedly 'what if' layout. The small diorama is based on the real hamlet of Port Carlisle, which was originally a canal basin with jetty and wharf to take coal and cotton from Liverpool via barges the 12 miles to Carlisle. The canal didn't last long as rail came along, they filled in the canal and put a branch line on the route with the basin and lock silting up. They are still there as is the trackbed but all signs of canal hardware and rail buildings are gone. Here's my idea, it's a fantasy idea that the branch survived and is sliding into gentle decay and inevitable closure. It will run a couple of Era 5/6 Type 1 BR diesels (if anyone makes them in TT120 that is!) and mixed goods as pasenger services are long gone. It's a rough draft, so all comments are welcome. 

Love your drawings. Don't think you need worry about compatibility, as others have said.

 

Quick tip about designing yourlayout.  A Hornby point is 166mm long. So  a crossover, as  you have at each end of your loop, is about 330m, 660mm for the two.  From the 1200mm total you've allowed, that leaves 540mm to play with, for the loop  body and for the bits beyond each end of the loop.

 

How do you use it? If you allowed 300 mm  for the loop body, it would just take a  couple of 57' coaches or around 6 wagons, leaving 240mm. Allow 150 on right for loco run around and buffer, catering for tanks  and small 0--6-0s, leaving 90mm for the other end, not a lot. However, if you allowed for shorter coaches or 4 wagons in the loop you could reduce it  to 200mm, and had only  tank engines so reducing the right hand end to  say 125mm, that would give you an  extra 125mm for the left hand end,  or 215mm  total.

[Tonyo262]

Thank you so much for the kind words and the wise advice about the dimensions, I’m still working all this out!  I’ve been a bit poorly sorry for the slow reply and I think I need to invest in some templates next.