Struggling to decide/come up with engaging swithing layout

[Matias K]

Hi RMweb, this will be my first time posting anything in here so please be kind!

So, I've been looking to make myself a OO switching layout but happen to be rather creatively bankrupt individual. My planned layout size is 1470mm x 390mm, just small enough to fit on top of an IKEA Kallax shelf.
I have already drawn few possible ideas in AnyRail based on layouts that I've seen and liked alot, even done little modifications here and there to fit my taste more.
It's just that while I could just recreate someone elses layout, I would rather create something of my own. Oh and while I could just make a simple Inglenook layout, I personally wish for something more with similar switching functionality.

 

It also doesn't help that my knowledge around railway terminology and prototypical usage of certain track formations is a bit rusty or non existing.

I know runaround is almost mandatory, but stuff like why loco sheds or siding rarely connect directly to mainline and instead use this weird zigzag thingy. (pictured below)

What is it called? Is it in any way prototypical thing to see or just there to save space/create more interesting shunting opportunities?

 

 

Now I don't mind if my layout isn't prototypical, far from it. Fun comes before everything after all! It would be just nice to know these things to make my own research for this stuff a bit easier.

 

Here are some of the layouts I've already sketched out in AnyRail:
 

 

Feedback, ideas, places to find switching layout track plans/info is more than welcome!

[TravisM]

Hi there,

 

Welcome to the RMWeb club, and most on here are very welcoming to newbie’s, so don’t be scared to ask questions.  You have some interesting ideas and you could use them straight of the mark, but I do have a few questions.

 

1, I notice you are in Finland, are you planning to model UK or European practices?

2, What scale are you modelling?

3, What era are you modelling, ie steam, diesel or change over?

4, The biggie, what do you want to achieve?  Sometimes we over extend ourselves and it looks a mess.  I like to follow the KISS principle (Keep it simple, stupid), as well as ‘less is sometimes more’.

 

Remember, this is all fun, so enjoy and don’t be too hard on yourself, or take notice of armchair critics.

[Wheatley]

Your weird zigzag thingy is a kickback siding and headshunt, they are popular with modellers because they are awkward and therefore interesting to shunt, and unpopular (but by no means unknown) on the real thing because they are awkward and therefore tedious to shunt :-)

 

For layout ideas Carl Arendt's site is still available here - https://www.carendt.com/micro-layout-design-gallery/micro-tymesaver-designs/

 

The link goes to the Time Saver page, a popular shunting puzzle invented by John Allen in the US. It's s been done so many times its a cliche but I quite like it. 

 

For UK layouts have a look at some of Iain Rice's books, there are several covering small layouts ! 

[DavidB-AU]

I concur with looking at some Ian Rice books. I'd also recommend looking at the prolific layouts of Ian Futers which are simple yet engaging to operate.

 

One thing I would avoid with a branch line terminus is a loco shed. While these are a staple of the BLT layout, more often than not the loco lived at the junction station and would only take water at the terminus. The loco shed takes up space that could be used for another industry to generate more traffic.

[The Johnster]

I agree about the loco shed, dead space for most of the time that could be replaced by a factory, dairy, wagon works, wharf, or something else that generates traffic in and out to make the shunting more interesting.  If you are going to be using steam engines, no harm in having a water column for them, though.

 

4 hours ago, Wheatley said:

Your weird zigzag thingy is a kickback siding and headshunt, they are popular with modellers because they are awkward and therefore interesting to shunt, and unpopular (but by no means unknown) on the real thing because they are awkward and therefore tedious to shunt :-)

 

The purpose of a headshunt is to enable movements between sidings to be carried out without interfering with traffic on the 'running line', where the timetabled trains run and are controlled by signals.  They were very common on what I call 'traditional' railways, i.e. those from before the general use of permanently coupled block trains, and can still be found in many places. 

 

As the primary purpose is shunting, there are two basic ways to go, one of which is the Inglenook/Timesaver approach, basically a shunting puzzle as a mathematical/logic mental exercise, or the 'goods service' approach where there is probably a 2-road goods yard and other sidings serving industries &c directly.  Trains arrive, are broken up into portions so that each wagon is placed where it needs to be for loading/unloading, and outgoing traffic is marshalled into the departing train. 

 

I'd suggest starting out with full-sized stiff card representations of track pieces, turnouts, crossings, &c (or even 1/10th scale), and laying them out on the baseboard in different formations for you to push wagons around on simulating the possible movements before settling on a trackplan that suits your needs.  Use matchsticks for 1/10th scale...  I understand and sympathise with your creative bankruptcy, but would recommend not cutting costs when it comes to your locomotive.  You only need one initially, so make it a good quality item that will provide smooth, controllable, slow running; this is vital to the 'user satisfaction' of a shunting layout!  Save money by avoiding DCC and hand-operate your points.

 

Welcome to the madness, I mean hobby, Matias.  You'll find plenty of advice here, and we like being asked questions so that we can show off how clever we are, though helping others out is very satisfying as well... 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 23 by The Johnster

[The Johnster]

Just a thought; check out a contributor here called NHY 581.  He has entries in the 'Layout Topics' thread, and despite a worrying obsession with sheep builds small but exquisitely detailed shunting layouts of much the sort I suspect you are thinking about, with deceptively simple trackplans.  Plenty inspiration there for you!

[RobinofLoxley]

Hello Matias,

 

One question - the layouts you have drawn have a problem as they require a train to leave the modelled scene as far as I can see. Do you have space for anything that can be attached to one end of the shelf, a cassette to take a train leaving the scene? This has a big impact on what can be done.

[Nearholmer]

A couple of thoughts:

 

1) It is far more effective to plan track formations in very constrained spaces in full size, than on screen or by scale drawings on paper. Here’s a thread I’ve got on the go at the moment about planning a layout in 1800x400, and you will that I’m using the downloadable turnout templates available from Peco (do you use Peco in Finland, or it it other makes?) and masking tape. Try to ignore where it goes rambling off onto things of no relevance to you!

It is more effective because it gives an instant appreciation for any potential clearance problems, and if you happen to have some trains, you can easily plonk them on the “track” to get a feel for things.

 

2) You talk about a “shunting layout”, then show drawings of what look like branch-line termini. The two need not necessarily be the same thing, in that there are/were plenty of places where goods shunting took place that aren’t/weren’t BLTs - you will find many small models based on factories, harbours etc, for instance.

 

One advantage of not-BLT layouts is that nearly all (not quite all) BLT had a runaround loop, and that quickly comes to dominate planning in a tight space. By not having a runaround in the scene, more space becomes free to do other things, and “industrial” layouts with a four-wheeled loco moving two or three wagons at a time about tend to look bigger (if people resist the temptation to cram them with big industrial buildings and a spider-web of track).

 

Edited January 23 by Nearholmer

[Matias K]

20 hours ago, TravisM said:

Hi there,

 

Welcome to the RMWeb club, and most on here are very welcoming to newbie’s, so don’t be scared to ask questions.  You have some interesting ideas and you could use them straight of the mark, but I do have a few questions.

 

1, I notice you are in Finland, are you planning to model UK or European practices?

2, What scale are you modelling?

3, What era are you modelling, ie steam, diesel or change over?

4, The biggie, what do you want to achieve?  Sometimes we over extend ourselves and it looks a mess.  I like to follow the KISS principle (Keep it simple, stupid), as well as ‘less is sometimes more’.

 

Remember, this is all fun, so enjoy and don’t be too hard on yourself, or take notice of armchair critics.

 

Thank you for the warm welcome!

 

Don't let my location fool you. I currently own a Bachmann J78 in BR black late crest livery so Era 5 steam in OO would be my main "focus" and while I know Bachmann isn't known for their great running or crawling locomotives, this one seems to be awfully good at it!
I'm also planning on getting an Accurascale Pannier tank, either in Br black late crest or green with the "British Railways" lettering, whenever they get around to releasing those.
And as you mentioned, it's propably a good idea not to try and set the bar too high and keep things simple instead, or at least more grounded.  I'm still quite young and got many layouts still ahead of me!

 

Here's my J72 with a custom coal load I made to replace the shiny Bachmann one:

 

[Matias K]

15 hours ago, The Johnster said:

I agree about the loco shed, dead space for most of the time that could be replaced by a factory, dairy, wagon works, wharf, or something else that generates traffic in and out to make the shunting more interesting.  If you are going to be using steam engines, no harm in having a water column for them, though.

 

 

The purpose of a headshunt is to enable movements between sidings to be carried out without interfering with traffic on the 'running line', where the timetabled trains run and are controlled by signals.  They were very common on what I call 'traditional' railways, i.e. those from before the general use of permanently coupled block trains, and can still be found in many places. 

 

As the primary purpose is shunting, there are two basic ways to go, one of which is the Inglenook/Timesaver approach, basically a shunting puzzle as a mathematical/logic mental exercise, or the 'goods service' approach where there is probably a 2-road goods yard and other sidings serving industries &c directly.  Trains arrive, are broken up into portions so that each wagon is placed where it needs to be for loading/unloading, and outgoing traffic is marshalled into the departing train. 

 

I'd suggest starting out with full-sized stiff card representations of track pieces, turnouts, crossings, &c (or even 1/10th scale), and laying them out on the baseboard in different formations for you to push wagons around on simulating the possible movements before settling on a trackplan that suits your needs.  Use matchsticks for 1/10th scale...  I understand and sympathise with your creative bankruptcy, but would recommend not cutting costs when it comes to your locomotive.  You only need one initially, so make it a good quality item that will provide smooth, controllable, slow running; this is vital to the 'user satisfaction' of a shunting layout!  Save money by avoiding DCC and hand-operate your points.

 

Welcome to the madness, I mean hobby, Matias.  You'll find plenty of advice here, and we like being asked questions so that we can show off how clever we are, though helping others out is very satisfying as well... 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for the warm welcome as well!

 

What I meant by being "creatively bankrupt" was that I am lacking any originality or creativity from my current plans... 😅 Money, while being a consideration isn't a "problem" and getting an NCB powercab or the TCS counterpart of that (LT-50 I think?) have crossed my mind since I have heard that adding a decoder can allow your locos to crawl much better.

Speaking of locomotives, crawling and investing in a good one! I already mentioned this in my reply to @TravisM but I currently own a Bachmann J78 and Bachmann locos are not known for their great performance, are they now...

Thankfully this one seems to be fine (in no small part to not having square bearings...) and I plan on getting one of the new Accurascale Pannier tanks whenever those come out.

 

In addition to all this I have to say that you are completely right with @Wheatley, the Shed must go and make room for an additional industry!

Also making a full or small scale mockup of the layout/track parts is a great suggestion that hadn't crossed my mind yet for whatever reason.

 

Oh and thank you for all the great info provided so far!

[The Johnster]

You're most welcome, let us know how the project progresses!

[TravisM]

2 hours ago, Matias K said:

 

Thank you for the warm welcome!

 

Don't let my location fool you. I currently own a Bachmann J78 in BR black late crest livery so Era 5 steam in OO would be my main "focus" and while I know Bachmann isn't known for their great running or crawling locomotives, this one seems to be awfully good at it!
I'm also planning on getting an Accurascale Pannier tank, either in Br black late crest or green with the "British Railways" lettering, whenever they get around to releasing those.
And as you mentioned, it's propably a good idea not to try and set the bar too high and keep things simple instead, or at least more grounded.  I'm still quite young and got many layouts still ahead of me!

 

Here's my J72 with a custom coal load I made to replace the shiny Bachmann one:

 

Having seen one of the Accurascale pannier tanks in the flesh earlier today, even though it was undecorated, it looked the part.  I forgot to ask, apart from what era your modelling, what area as well?  In most cases, a J78 and pannier tank would have been poles apart as I think (happy to be corrected) that J78’s were a northeast loco, where as the pannier’s could be found just about all over the western region.

 

As I’ve found with my ‘The Docks’ layout, you need to plan your shortest siding so it can accommodate your biggest loco with your longest piece of rolling stock.  Something I’ve learned from bitter experience.

 

Also, don’t let being young put you off as most of us here are big kids at heart 😜 

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, TravisM said:

that J78’s were a northeast loco

 

Apparently they were, but they looked like this.  The Bachmann loco is of course a J72, also originally an NER loco, but later used more widely on LNER lines.  But location needn't matter much, as a simple layout without many identifying featres can move about to a greater or lesser extent - see this thread.

 

A look through the Micro layouts etc section of the Forum will probably throw up some inspiration.

[DCB]

A  couple of basic points.

When designing a shunting layout you need to work out which locomotives you will use.   The old branch lines were often  unable to cope with the length of six axle diesels,  or 2-6-0 tender locos and there was not enough length beyond run round points for the points to be changed, so they could not run round hence keep the length down to have the buffers against the end of the layout.

If you enjoy shunting, then shunt.  My top doodle is four sidings.   Full size railways shunted wagons into station and destination order, Coal  empties into colliery order  pre WW2 that would often be wagons with different colliery names on, vacuum brake wagons would be shunted to the front of a fast goods for extra brake power, or separated into fast brake fitted and slow non brake fitted trains. Some yards served only traffic in one direction.    
Stations often had vehicles shunted to specific platforms or sidings even areas of sidings, but incoming wagons come in first before the outgoing so a station or yard could become clogged,  Brake Vans roamed like locomotives, on rosters, often a rural branch had one brake van which was on every train,   they seldom got left with the other wagons... Scale length wagons help with space, most 00 coal wagons are on 10ft wheelbase instead of 9ft, that makes quite a difference 1 wagon every 2 feet...

 

None of the plans work without a separate board for a headshunt.   A long headshunt and only two sidings can be interesting  shunting,  my branch terminus "Ugleigh" takes about 20 minutes to shunt especially if the loco doesn't have the power to shift both incoming and out going wagons

[Harlequin]

Hi Matias,

 

The Americans would call this a switching layout but in British terminology we don't use the term "switching" so much in this context. We call it shunting. (Switching usually refers to electrical gubbins.)

 

With the small footprint you have available it's definitely best to keep the plan simple. You need to use just enough turnouts to make the layout entertaining and no more, and employ as many clever tricks as you can to avoid turnouts.

(A "Turnout" is a ready-made bit of track combining a set of points and a common crossing.)

 

If shunting is the aim here, do you need to clutter things up with passenger-related platforms and station buildings?

 

Some sort of temporary, off-scene track work (a "fiddle yard") can represent "the rest of the world" where locos and wagons come from and go to. It can also do the job of some of the station turnouts (see previous point). For instance, it can act as the turnout at the far end of the run round loop. ("Run round", not "runaround.") The simplest fiddle yard is just a length of track that you connect to the layout when you want to operate it, like @DCB showed above.

 

The plan will look more interesting and dynamic if the main line is curved and/or diagonal.

 

Edited January 24 by Harlequin

[Schooner]

Surprised we've come this far without giving @NHY 581 - he of exquisite shunting layouts on IKEA furniture - a nudge!

 

Pop the kettle on and settle down here for inspiration on all things modelling:

 

Engagement, for me*, stems from three things:

• Immersion - the scene and activities must convince, otherwise it's just toy train moving backwards and forwards
• Challenge - it must be possible to get caught out or stuck if I don't pay attention; otherwise I find it hard to lose myself in the shunting :)
• Reason/narrative - I want the 'story' of an operating session to be easily visible, so I don't have to work hard to invent a reason for each move. This links the previous two points.

*With two inglenook-puzzle-based layouts, with which I can remain happily engaged for hours at a time.

 

One can do away with any of these - a 'pure' Timesaver puzzle of bare track on a bare board, for example - and people do. But I would not find that engaging as, say, an identical trackplan but depicting a section of internal/industrial railway, or linked parts of a steel plant; or a set of exchange sidings for a quarry; or a post-Beeching BLT-turned-goods-only-station etc etc etc.

 

Happily, none of these are size-limited, so it's just a case of scaling what works for you to suit :)

 

 

 

PS. ...but do include a run-round loop!

 

Edited January 24 by Schooner
Sp!

[PMP]

This link takes you to my old layout Shelfie1. It was designed to be a test piece and the original footprint was about the same as you’re suggesting.

https://albionyard.com/2020/01/28/transformation-tuesday-shelfie-1/

 

The design used a flying fiddleyard, which is a single track extension off the far end of the above picture. I had two of 30cm and 60cm lengths. These allow you to run a train on and off the layout, as well as help with switching.

as you can see the layout has only two sidings from the run round loop, but using a concrete loading area gives much more play value and realism. The headshunt was long enough to allow a pannier and wagon to use it or a larger locomotive like a 9F or Deltic as the layout was a test bed for review models.

The other element in the design was that it was able to be used for HO models as there was nothing in it that defined it as UK. 

 

Your choice of baseboard will mean that you will need to operate points by hand, have side mounted motors or raise the trackbed to fit point motors underneath. If you choose side mounted motors you can extend the movement to have the motor’s hidden in the scenery as shown below. I’d also suggest making sure each rail has a double feed to it for redundancy as wiring them through the IKEA shelf won’t be easy.

 

 

 

[NHY 581]

Hi Matias, 

 

My thanks to Jonners @The Johnster and Louis @Schooner for the kind comments. 

 

I've built five layouts now, all on IKEA shelves or table tops from the LACK range. 

 

This is my current build ( no.6 ) Started earlier this month as a bit of a quick build, for various reasons it's not proving to be as quick as I'd hoped ! 

 

It's plonked onto a 110cm x 26cm LACK shelf and the plan is to add a fiddle yard to the right of the below image. This will be a PERSBY floating shelf, 80cm x 26cm. Both shelves are 5cm deep. 

 

 

Wiring can be dropped through the top surface and then hooked out but you need to disturb the cardboard core to create a bit of a tunnel through which to bring the wires out.

 

 

I use speaker wire as a bus wire. Wiring is kept to a minimum and as Paul mentions above, I choose to manually operate the points, pokey finger as I call it.......

 

 

I intend only using small locos so either 0.4.0T or 0.6.0T. The U.S.A tank is about as big as I can accomodate and I'm happy with that. Trains are no more than a couple of wagons plus a  brake van as a maximum. 

 

 

In this form, the layout is easily stored and can be placed on a dining table to operate. Stock really needs no more than ten wagons/brake van and say two locos for variety. 

 

Hope this helps. 

 

Rob. 

 

 

 

Edited January 24 by NHY 581

[AndyB]

Hi Matias.

Thank you for sharing your layout idea with us. 

 

Point control was mentioned earlier. 

 

For a layout this size I'd opt for "wire in tube" which can be buried within the scenery and ballast if needed. Alternatively you could cut a small channel into the baseboard surface if needed though. 

 

If you need more details drop me a PM; I wouldnt want to muddy your design thread. 

 

Kind regards. Andy

 

Edited January 25 by AndyB

[F-UnitMad]

On 22/01/2024 at 21:17, Matias K said:

Oh and while I could just make a simple Inglenook layout, I personally wish for something more with similar switching functionality.

Don't dismiss the 'Inglenook' plan too quickly.

You need to follow the writings of U.S. modeller Lance Mindheim. Although he obviously focuses on U.S. operations the principles apply to other railways too.

The main thing to remember is that shunting complexity (that we want, for interest) is NOT based on complex track plans. It is based on "car spots", or in UK terms, it's the individual destinations where you shunt specific wagons to on the layout.

In this blog, Lance outlines how even a one-turnout layout can provide a lot of shunting....

https://lancemindheim.com/2012/09/a-one-turnout-layout/

 

Now in terms of a UK Steam Era goods yard, let's say it's 3 sidings as per the Inglenook plan. One siding might be for the coal merchants. But another siding could have a goods shed, yard crane & cattle dock all on the same line. 3 destinations that specific wagons have to be shunted to - the coal or cattle traffic would not go to the shed or crane, for example.

So there is more shunting involved on an Inglenook than would seem just on paper - without - and this is important - without using artificial 'gimmicks' such as shunting puzzles to keep the interest going.

 

Now it all sounds good in theory, but takes a bit of faith to believe that 'less is more' and design & build a 'simple' layout. My American O layout has a very simple, two-turnout/3 (staggered) spurs industrial yard, but there are seperate industries, with 9 car spots, some of which are for specific freight traffic. Using a simple computer-generated switch list, shunting a train of 5 incoming cars can take over an hour, especially if outbound cars haven't yet been pulled, or other cars already 'on spot' are staying in position.

Myself & my friend @the black knight regularly operate it, and he says how he tells others about how simple my layout looks on paper (or in photos, as posted) but how absorbing it is to operate.

 

So don't dismiss 'simple' track plans too readily. 😉👍

 

View along the layout (still under construction)....

Main line runs past in foreground, other track splits into first spur for Food Processor & Chemicals Distributor (5 car spots in total), and in background the middle track then splits into two more spurs to a Warehouse, & trans-load hardstanding (4 car spots).

 

 

[Typographer]

I enjoyed making a tiny inglenook during lockdown, it was my return to modelling after 40+ years! Very satisfying organising 5-wagon trains in your own dining room. Shuffle the cards to decide how to deploy the wagons, then shuffle again to decide on your consist. It was essential training for the garage layout I am (still) constructing...

[Geep7]

One of my favourite small switching layout track plans is Box Street Yard, designed by the late Jack Trollope.

 

It uses a fiddle track stick/sector plate as part of the run-round loop.

 

My own adaptation of this track-plan formed my first US exhibition layout Masons Bridge Yard.

The difference is that I added an additional siding at the top to serve a power station.