New beginners layout N or OO and plans

[PaulRhB]

Hi Andy, I’d collect a folder of pics off the net that are what you want to help in the decision. If it’s small cameo scenes that dominate then 00 is probably better, if it’s trains in countryside then N obviously has an advantage in your space. Another thing to play with is viewing level. You can make sharp curves less obvious by raising up the layout or operating from a chair so eye level is closer to how we usually view the railway. Higher layouts allow for storage or even spare beds beneath but can obstruct windows. Mocking it up like you’ve done using locos and stock and boxes to try out ideas is great, take photos from different angles and see if it works how you want. Leaving it a few hours or a day and coming back to it afresh helps too to see what works and what doesn’t. 
Have fun with planning and trying out ideas before you commit to construction 😉

Edited November 20, 2022 by PaulRhB

[EMA747]

Paul - I think I am torn between a more detailed OO scene and I do like trains running through the countryside which can look more impressive with the speed in my opinion. 

 

One major factor that puts me off running more expansive layout is that I don't really have the cash to be buying loads of rolling stock to make up realistically long rakes. I could manage a couple of 10-12 wagon rakes but that's probably going to be £300-500 per rake!!! In OO I there is no way I'd be able to run anything more than about 6-7 waggons without it looking a bit silly though. If I was to go for a TMD layout I could concentrate on a collection of locos with minimal waggons which might be a more "interesting" use of budget?

 

I definitely like the suggestion on the pervious page for making a layout that could be built up bit by bit. I want something I can get started on and be able to run some trains but doing a whole room roundy might take me so long that it could get frustrating/disheartening.

[Davexoc]

I'd go N gauge, but then I'm probably biased. If you start with a TMD the running through the countryside could come later.

I can run a full length MGR coal train on my layout, and it just about fits on the straight, but the radius of the curves are quite big.

If you are happy with handling 'N', then go for it....

[PaulRhB]

1 hour ago, EMA747 said:

though. If I was to go for a TMD layout I could concentrate on a collection of locos with minimal waggons which might be a more "interesting" use of budget?

Well how about a TMD and a wagon repair works next to it. That way you can have a selection of disparate wagons arriving and leaving?

 

 

[EMA747]

I like that idea Paul. Could be a good mix of locos and wagons without having to have really long trains. I'm not sure how I would fit a TMD and wagons works in my space though.

 

Can anyone help with a rough trackplan for a modern TMD layout in a space roughly 2.5x0.6-0.7m? With the possibility to extend beyond that eventually with a through line would be ideal.

[EMA747]

23 minutes ago, Davexoc said:

I'd go N gauge, but then I'm probably biased. If you start with a TMD the running through the countryside could come later.

I can run a full length MGR coal train on my layout, and it just about fits on the straight, but the radius of the curves are quite big.

If you are happy with handling 'N', then go for it....

I keep looking at my OO and N models sitting in my room and feeling N gauge just kind of fits the room size better. But I don't think I'd know until I get started. 

[Davexoc]

13 minutes ago, EMA747 said:

I like that idea Paul. Could be a good mix of locos and wagons without having to have really long trains. I'm not sure how I would fit a TMD and wagons works in my space though.

 

Can anyone help with a rough trackplan for a modern TMD layout in a space roughly 2.5x0.6-0.7m? With the possibility to extend beyond that eventually with a through line would be ideal.

 

Do you want the modern version/excuse for a TMD?

 

 

Or a run down but expansive TMD?

 

 

Both are Thornaby, both incorporate a wagon repair shed, but one is 'OO' the other is 'N'

 

[ikcdab]

1 hour ago, EMA747 said:

 

One major factor that puts me off running more expansive layout is that I don't really have the cash to be buying loads of rolling stock to make up realistically long rakes. I could manage a couple of 10-12 wagon rakes but that's probably going to be £300-500 per rake!!! 

Not necessarily! I recently built up a rake of 20 coal wagons. From local shows and on eBay I bought unbuilt airfix kits. I never paid more than £5 per kit and these original airfix ones are vastly superior to the later Dapol versions.

Add metal wheels at £3 A pair and £2 for couplings, then you have a decent wagon for £10 after a couple of evenings work. So my complete rake of 20 cost me no more than £200, and that was spent over 2 or 3 months. 

There are lots of other ways you can acquire decent wagons at a lower cost.

Ian

[EMA747]

Dave I see what you mean but again I'm not sure if size or detail are the way to go. I suppose if I really think about it some form of interest while running trains is important so a simple one track depot might not be the best. I go past Derby RCT most days and I find that really interesting with it's mix of DRS stock and others. I mentioned earlier that I think Eden Road layout looks amazing so something like that would be good but I seem to remember reading that that layout is a bit longer than my space. A TMD on an L shape would work but not sure if that's too common a layout. 

[PaulRhB]

1 hour ago, EMA747 said:

I keep looking at my OO and N models sitting in my room and feeling N gauge just kind of fits the room size better. But I don't think I'd know until I get started. 

Lay out some ideas on lining paper full size using pencil then markers and put some stock on and look at it from various angles and take some pics then mull over those for a few days. 
 

1 hour ago, EMA747 said:

I'm not sure how I would fit a TMD and wagons works in my space though.

I think the photo Dave posted shows how small a TMD or stabling point can be, you can add another couple of sidings, a couple of stores containers and maybe even a single road covered shed and squeeze it in anywhere. It can be part of the same complex of sheds as a wagon works or squeezed in at the side or one end. 
Southampton Maritime is another smallish depot between the mainline, Freightliner crane reception sidings and docks. 
Dropped pin
https://maps.app.goo.gl/88CXHH7qSPUW5i8XA?g_st=ic

 

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by PaulRhB

[AndrueC]

11 hours ago, EMA747 said:

Paul - I think I am torn between a more detailed OO scene and I do like trains running through the countryside which can look more impressive with the speed in my opinion.

Detail in N isn't impossible - there are some really good layouts out there that prove it - but I'll concede that it can be difficult depending on what you're after.

 

Getting it to the point where it looks good from a distance isn't difficult. From a metre away your eyes and brain will happily fill in the blanks and ignore oddities. That means that if you want to see trains running through the countryside from a bird's eye view that's not a problem. The real skill is required if you want to indulge in macro photography and create line-side images. At that point you're really fighting the optics and your modelling skills need to be top-notch.

[EMA747]

So I had a bit of a play on anyrail to see what a small TMD and wagon works would look like in OO on a roughyl 295x65mm board allowing for future expansions.  I don't know if it would be too cramped as the 3D view on Anyrail doesn't show the sheds etc. 

 

I know some of the track is a bit wonky but it's just a quick plan.

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by EMA747

[PaulRhB]

34 minutes ago, EMA747 said:

So I had a bit of a play on anyrail to see what a small TMD and wagon works would look like in OO on a roughyl 295x65mm board allowing for future expansions.  I don't know if it would be too cramped as the 3D view on Anyrail doesn't show the sheds etc. 

 

I know some of the track is a bit wonky but it's just a quick plan.

 

Great start, about the only change I would consider is flipping the TMD and crossover between the mainlines to mirror image it so the entrance is on the left side. Except passing loops and junctions where possible, like the wagon works entrance, they prefer points to such sidings / depots to be ‘trailing’. Trailing means you don’t have the risk of the train splitting the point blades at speed and causes less wear too. So with left hand running your wagon works entrance is ‘trailing’ and you reverse the train in at low speed over the then ‘facing’ point, (a facing move being where you have two possible routes) 

However 😉 you can leave it as is if the mainline linespeed is low because it’s next to a station or similar. The deciding factor is really speed, they don’t like ‘facing’ points on high speed lines so they use special high speed points with more locking mechanisms. 
So in summary if you want high speed trains belting round the loops reverse the connections as my lines in red. 
 

Edited November 21, 2022 by PaulRhB

[Artless Bodger]

Hello and welcome to the forum. I've had both OO and N in a roughly 8' x 8' room, door in the corner (a typical semi box room). The OO had a double track roundy layout with 2nd and 1st radius set track curves in 8' x 5'. Train length was limited to loco plus 3 (mk1) coaches. However I found that with increasing development of fine detail on newer stock (nearer scale wheels, all wheels flanged etc) many items struggled on the 1st radius, some even on 2nd radius. This, and a back problem impinging on a duckunder baseboard, led me to return to N gauge (for which I still had some GF Poole stock). Though most new items are said to be, or recommended as, 2nd radius minimum, I have found some GF and Dapol diesels will run happily round 1st radius PECO set track (9" radius) - GF classes 37, 24, Dapol classes 73 and 33. Dapol tender motored steam locos tend to derail on 9" (Q1). Union Mills steam locos are generally fine unless you drastically shorten the wire from the tender to the loco - as I did on my 700 - it makes the connection stiffer and can derail occasionally.

 

My N gauge was initially a J shape, 8' x 8' x 5'. It was a single track dogbone with a terminus within the loop on the 8' end, a through junction station on the middle 8' and an (intended) countryside scenic section on the 5' loop. It was too ambitious for my skills and could not cope with my changing ideas and desires. The loop round behind the terminus (hidden under a townscape) was 9" radius, the board was about 20" wide maximum.  This layout had several issues, the most serious was it crossed the window about 6" above the cill, restricting light and space for my modelling table. The end came when the windows needed replacing, and the board had to be cut through with a big saw! Since then I've got an L shape 8' x 5', the 5' bit is 2'3" wide and actually incorporates 3 continuous runs (1st 2nd 3rd radius set track), a station and goods yard. The outer continuous run links as an out and back to the 4 platform terminus on the remaining part of the 8' leg. 

 

Now the drawbacks: 

1. I don't really know what I want from a layout.

2. Shunting and operating an N gauge layout with standard Rapido type couplings is a nuisance.

3. I rarely run anything and need to clean the track to do so.

4. Mixture of live and dead frog points, finger operated, without frog switching leads to jerky operation.

5. I've too eclectic an interest so it is firmly rule 1.

6. As others have said, aquiring a full train of a particular style (e.g. NSE, GWR), loco plus representative train is both expensive and often impossible due to availability.

7. It's fiddly and even with a magnifyer I'm reaching the limit with making kits etc, so upscaling is in prospect (OO).

 

The good points:

1. I mainly enjoy tinkering, and have learned a lot from this and other fora.

2. Kits are good and relatively cheap, I've made quite a few N Gauge Society wagons, and PECO wagon kits offer the base for some adaptation.

3. There are no lifting flaps, duckunders etc and the window is unobstructed so my modelling table has natural light.

4. It has a mainline feel.

 

I'd hesitate to give advice as everyone's interests are different and I'm by no means of the standard you see mostly on here. I think your U shape plan in N gauge could give you a lot of operational capability, say a terminus, out and back with fiddle yard in the return loop leg, trains of up to loco plus 5/6 mk1 equivalent if you wanted, engine shed and goods yard. Equally if locos are your main interest then an MPD type layout would give you detail and interest in a small area, and though I'm no fan of DCC sound you could do the soundscape too if you wished.

 

The main thing as several people have already said is to get something underway to maintain interest and to accomodate the models you make.

[RobinofLoxley]

I wouldn't worry too much about the cost of stuff. It can be acquired over a long period of time and the kit route for wagons especially offers options. You can spend more time learning about scratchbuilding, which tools aside, is a pretty cheap way in. Card kits also arent expensive and there are options such a scalescenes to print you own materials. If you have access to a 3-D printer that also opens up a lot of possibilities.

[PaulRhB]

9 minutes ago, RobinofLoxley said:

Card kits also arent expensive and there are options such a scalescenes to print you own materials.

Yes and especially with buildings you can easily upgrade them later. 

[EMA747]

10 hours ago, Artless Bodger said:

Now the drawbacks: 

1. I don't really know what I want from a layout.

2. Shunting and operating an N gauge layout with standard Rapido type couplings is a nuisance.

3. I rarely run anything and need to clean the track to do so.

4. Mixture of live and dead frog points, finger operated, without frog switching leads to jerky operation.

5. I've too eclectic an interest so it is firmly rule 1.

6. As others have said, aquiring a full train of a particular style (e.g. NSE, GWR), loco plus representative train is both expensive and often impossible due to availability.

7. It's fiddly and even with a magnifyer I'm reaching the limit with making kits etc, so upscaling is in prospect (OO).

 

 

Are you saying that running trains in N gauge is quite troublesome? I have seen a few videos that make N gauge looks like it struggles over points much more than I would like. 

I have a busy life so it's not going to be something that I am running every day so if it's going to need a lot of attention just to get it running it's maybe not the right choice for me?

[Davexoc]

41 minutes ago, EMA747 said:

Are you saying that running trains in N gauge is quite troublesome? I have seen a few videos that make N gauge looks like it struggles over points much more than I would like. 

I have a busy life so it's not going to be something that I am running every day so if it's going to need a lot of attention just to get it running it's maybe not the right choice for me?

 

Providing you use live frog points, it shouldn't be a problem. Anything short wheelbase (think 08 ie 0-6-0) might be more sensitive to dirty track, but should still run reliably.

The areas you need to be aware of, and this goes for other gauges too, are to take care around the blades of points if painting the rails, the same when gluing ballast, either by using dropper or if spraying with washing-up liquid solution to wet powdered glues. Washing-up liquid on the rails can dry to a fairly good insulating layer....

[Artless Bodger]

18 hours ago, EMA747 said:

Are you saying that running trains in N gauge is quite troublesome? I have seen a few videos that make N gauge looks like it struggles over points much more than I would like. 

I have a busy life so it's not going to be something that I am running every day so if it's going to need a lot of attention just to get it running it's maybe not the right choice for me?

I was probably a bit too hard on N gauge, there are plenty of good layouts out there, and they were observations drawn from my experience - I'm certainly not of the level of ability seen on RMWeb for instance. 

 

I agree with Davexoc's observations, the drawbacks I listed really apply to my own layout. If you are using motors for the points and incorporate frog switching then you will not rely on point blade contact (which I do  and have to use fine wet and dry at times to clean the blade tips).  

 

Short locos can be an issue though surprisingly my 04 and 08 are two of my better runners. It helps to check the pick ups all make contact, I prefer diesels mainly now for their long pick up wheelbase - small tank engines end up largely as hangar queens.

 

Track cleaning - when I want to run I usually need to clean all the track and removing the scenery over the tunnels and hidden curves is a chore - my fault for badly designed lift off bits and having points under bridges, that sort of thing. Cleaning needs care to avoid dislodging scenic bits, platforms etc. 

 

Shunting - this is my main operating issue, I have the operating potential but rarely use it because the wagons are very light and trying to use a wire uncoupling hook to lift one coupling, even PECO Elsies, can derail the wagon - but this may be just my clumsiness. There are other coupling types - Dapol Easishunt, Kadee / Microtrains and some etched types (D&S?) which offer hands off and delayed coupling but I'm either too tight to buy them or can't cope with the fiddly bits.

 

For me N gauge is good for running trains and watching them go by in a limited space.

[EMA747]

I had some time off work today so I got out some cardboard and did a mock up in OO of what would be the TMD side of my layout (as per the plans posted earlier).  This section is 295cm/9 foot 8 long by but I can't work out if it looks too cramped or not. With the locos it looks fine I think but if there are pulling anything, even a very short wagon train it might not look so good? 

 

I'm still very much on the fence on OO or N gauge. I went to the Warley show last weekend and got some inspiration but I still can't decide. There were some amazing looking N layouts but I don't know if my modelling skills are up to the standards required to make it look good enough that I won't be disappointed with my efforts. 

 

Edited December 2, 2022 by EMA747

[RobinofLoxley]

AS you have laid the track down on the board they all look too far apart. Cramped, no. Tracks in reality should be quite close together, its the tight curves that require the space to allow long wheelbase stock to pass each other that causes the standard setrack separation to be so wide. Otherwise, separation is needed to allow for example road vehicle access, for a plausible layout.

[Flying Pig]

How likely are you to extend the layout in the foreseeable future?  If you built the layout as a self-contained end to end, or even an L with a short fiddle yard attached you actually have a decent length of board.  If you stick to a loco depot and wagon repair works you probably don't need to accommodate anything longer than a loco and three or four bogie vehicles.

[AndyB]

As RoL observed it doesn't looked cramped. You might consider whether a bit more track could be accommodated? I say this because the wagon works looks a little sparse. 

If you want some inspiration then Peco Setrack N Gauge Planbook has a wagon works with mainline which you might afspy for OO. It's plan 9 in the book.  You wouldn't get all of it in bit it might give you some ideas.

Andy

[Flying Pig]

A couple of ideas, just for the heck of it.  

 

Everything to the left of the bridge on this plan was a 00 microlayout that was quite well known on the exhibition circuit, comprising a short passenger platform and a wagon repair facilitiy.  A new owner wanted to extend as an L.  The new section is meant to suggest a single line that has been truncated and the wagon works is built on the site of a former goods yard.  The platform as already modelled was modern, so the story was that the former station had been demolished and a new platform built further up the line.

 

 

Second an idea inspired by a cab ride video on Youtube that is unfortunately no longer available. It is an N gauge scheme, based on a simplified version of Arpley Junction in Warrington, where a connection from the WCML via Arpley Sidings (lower left line) meets a former route between Liverpool via Widnes (upper left) and Manchester (upper right).  The latter section was truncated just to the right (East) of the layout as drawn and trains were limited to freight services between Arpley and yards in the Liverpool area which ran round and reversed at the junction - this would form the basis of operation.

 

There was a wagon repair depot at Arpley Sidings which until the last few years saw mixed trains of wagons for repair from the Widnes route.  I moved it onto the layout to give more interesting  operation.  You could easily add sidings to the upper left of the plan (in reality there were formerly sidings behind the signal box) for loco servicing, with consequent traffic between there and Arpley sidings.

 

Edited December 3, 2022 by Flying Pig

[EMA747]

  

15 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

How likely are you to extend the layout in the foreseeable future?  If you built the layout as a self-contained end to end, or even an L with a short fiddle yard attached you actually have a decent length of board.  If you stick to a loco depot and wagon repair works you probably don't need to accommodate anything longer than a loco and three or four bogie vehicles.

The idea was to have something to start with that I could get on with building but would be part of a bigger plan. I am renting the house for the foreseeable future but I want something that is in sections so it can be moved if necessary. 

 

The big idea was a TMD and wagon works down one side and then at the bottom of the picture (where I have written "through lines") there would be a scene break and the next section would be a country branch line leading to the TMD that I could practice some real detail modelling on the scenery.There would then be a duck under or lift out section to join back to the far end of the TMD section. Below is a rough idea of what I mean. 

 

Without realising it I have got in my mind something very similar to Colwich Junction.