Advice & Comments wanted on OO 10' x 2' layout

[sdw7300]

Hi and thanks for looking at this thread – I would like to ask the great & good of this parish for advice & comments on a proposed layout.

 

Background

 

I started my first layout, a 6’x1’ OO gauge shunting plank layout last year and got as far as wiring the track & control panel, but the arrival on baby number two slowed progress to a holt. I was, however, getting a bit disheartened by the layout as it was just 4 dead straight tracks with little room for any scenics. So rather than continue with something that didn’t feel right I have decided to start again…

 

I have roughly 10’ x 2’ to play with. The right hand end will need to include a 90 degree curve to a separate fiddle yard (which will be made from the old layout).

 

Era-wise the layout will be set in the early 90’s running mainly triple grey class 37’s, but I also have an 08, 58 & 60 which will be making appearances. I’m really inspired by some of the amazing TMD’s on here (Deeping Lane, Stockton Road to name but a few) but also want to run some wagons to include some shunting potential. I have some TTA’s, a couple of Lima larger oil tankers and I’m in the process of slowing buying some Dutch departmental wagons (Seacows, Limpets, a Shark)

 

I want to include an oil Terminal/ unloading facility, engine maintenance shed / yard and a ballast loading / P-Way maintenance yard. I also didn’t want to crowd the layout with too much track and leave some room for some basic scenics (site office, oil tanks, yard car parks etc)

 

Below is a first draft sketched out in AnyRail (what a great/user friendly piece of software!) I plan to use Peco SL code 100 track.

 

 

Your thoughts / comments would be most welcome.

 

Many thanks

 

Sam

 

 

[Nickinwestwales]

Hi Sam-Looks like I`m first out of the blocks so here goes-First off,agree R.E anyrail-have you tried SCARM-broadly similar but gives a 3D option which is v.helpful for visualising the end result. 

To the plan-Yup-like it! -has a nice open feel to it,can see lots of nice sight lines for low angle piccies,the depot hides the curve off the main board effectively-all good.

The only slight niggle I have is the entrance to the oil store-I`m sure I will be called out on this by the multitude,but I can`t see the arrangement of the arrival line running straight into a hazardous material store being prototypical-also the slip half way into the storage area doesn`t sit well-all incoming trip freights would have to enter the store to run round.

Perhaps slewing the arrival/runround lines in between the oil depot and the ballast yard (which would extend the runround length as well) & feeding the oil store from a connection nearer the yard throat might provide a better option ?-The Oil tanks could be moved forward and the tracks fed in behind them and the whole of that compound narrowed slightly to make room

Following that thought,the various elements could then get some height separation as well with the oil store line rising slightly,the runround staying at datum & the ballast yard & loco shed slightly lower-only about 1/2 " between each level but would remove the `billiard table` look 

Also,what is the purpose of the spur at top right ? -to my devious mind it is crying out to feed a low relief warehouse or somesuch ,thus generating another small traffic flow.

So,1 small niggle & a couple of `what abouts` -All in all-I like it -a fine little display piece for your locos with enough potential operating interest to keep you coming back to it-look forward to hearing more

ATB

Nick

[sdw7300]

Hi Sam-Looks like I`m first out of the blocks so here goes-First off,agree R.E anyrail-have you tried SCARM-broadly similar but gives a 3D option which is v.helpful for visualising the end result. 

To the plan-Yup-like it! -has a nice open feel to it,can see lots of nice sight lines for low angle piccies,the depot hides the curve off the main board effectively-all good.

The only slight niggle I have is the entrance to the oil store-I`m sure I will be called out on this by the multitude,but I can`t see the arrangement of the arrival line running straight into a hazardous material store being prototypical-also the slip half way into the storage area doesn`t sit well-all incoming trip freights would have to enter the store to run round.

Perhaps slewing the arrival/runround lines in between the oil depot and the ballast yard (which would extend the runround length as well) & feeding the oil store from a connection nearer the yard throat might provide a better option ?-The Oil tanks could be moved forward and the tracks fed in behind them and the whole of that compound narrowed slightly to make room

Following that thought,the various elements could then get some height separation as well with the oil store line rising slightly,the runround staying at datum & the ballast yard & loco shed slightly lower-only about 1/2 " between each level but would remove the `billiard table` look 

Also,what is the purpose of the spur at top right ? -to my devious mind it is crying out to feed a low relief warehouse or somesuch ,thus generating another small traffic flow.

So,1 small niggle & a couple of `what abouts` -All in all-I like it -a fine little display piece for your locos with enough potential operating interest to keep you coming back to it-look forward to hearing more

ATB

Nick

Thanks Nick. I see what you mean about a loco needing to enter the oil terminal to run around. I can't quite picture/follow your suggestion. Will have a play at moving the run around in AnyRail. The spur top right is a home for the 08 shunter! It doesn't need to be long so could prob still fit a low relief warehouse in.

 

The idea of slightly staggering the heights sounds interesting. Would add a lot visually. Not sure if it might be a step too far for my first layout. I don't want run away wagons when shunting!

 

Many thanks for taking the time to comment.

 

Sam

[MattWallace]

Thanks Nick. I see what you mean about a loco needing to enter the oil terminal to run around. I can't quite picture/follow your suggestion. Will have a play at moving the run around in AnyRail. The spur top right is a home for the 08 shunter! It doesn't need to be long so could prob still fit a low relief warehouse in.

 

The idea of slightly staggering the heights sounds interesting. Would add a lot visually. Not sure if it might be a step too far for my first layout. I don't want run away wagons when shunting!

 

Many thanks for taking the time to comment.

 

Sam

 

Why not swap the ballast and the oil terminal?

 

That way your "run-around" is closer to a "safe" ballast instead of "dangerous" oil, a "runaway" heading into the yard won't end up rupturing anything flammable and you can keep your headshunt...

 

Apart from that, it's an excellent, clear, easily operable layout and one I wish I had designed - I'll follow with interest

[sdw7300]

Thanks for your comments Matt. The plan is for this layout to go in the garage as I'd discounted the loft (see my comments on your Redcot thread) but you've got me thinking now....

[MattWallace]

Just took another look at your track diagram and realised that each of those squares is 1/2ft, not 1ft as I previously assumed. 

 

I was wondering how you'd managed to squeeze all that into the size space that you have an now I know!

 

You might want to swap the larger tankers for smaller ones as they take up about 1ft of space each (assuming they're the ones I'm thinking of!) and so you'll only be able to fit "loco+2" in to either of your oil or ballast sidings before you start to get too close to the point-work for other services to pass them.

 

One of the best things about Anyrail is the ability to print off the layout easily in full size so that you can lay out the rolling stock before you lay down any track.

 

I'd recommend doing this - it saved me loads of time on Blockwall Junction  and allows you to see just how many tankers/hopper wagons you can get into a siding before you lay track.

 

I've switched to using xtrckcad instead of AnyRail because I'm too tight to pay the £35 license fee and needed more than 50 pieces of track, but I've not worked out how to print 1:1 yet!

 

Matt

[sdw7300]

Just took another look at your track diagram and realised that each of those squares is 1/2ft, not 1ft as I previously assumed.

 

I was wondering how you'd managed to squeeze all that into the size space that you have an now I know!

Doh! Yes, the squares are 15cm. Sorry for the confusion.

 

I plan to print 1:1 when I get a little nearer track laying. Still need to rearrange the garage to free up the space.

[MattWallace]

Doh! Yes, the squares are 15cm. Sorry for the confusion.

 

I plan to print 1:1 when I get a little nearer track laying. Still need to rearrange the garage to free up the space.

Heh, I remember that well! So glad that the loft didn't have anything in it before we boarded it out - makes life a lot easier (and another reason to use it hint hint... )!

[Chimer]

 

I've switched to using xtrckcad ............, but I've not worked out how to print 1:1 yet!

 

Matt

 

Off topic but as you asked ...just set "Print Scale" (first field in the Print dialog box) to 1.

[sdw7300]

Evening All.

 

Had a play with the track plan, incorporating some of the points raised above:

 

 

Note - the squares are 15cm.

 

This does away with the double slip and does away with the arriving trains having to head into the oil terminal to run-around. It also allows longer trains, even upto 6 TEA's to arrive in the top siding. They can then be split in half at the top red dot and shunted into on of the oil unloading siding. The second half could then be shunted into the second oil unloading siding. (That's probably academic as I doubt I'd run trains that long!) The same could happen into the ballast / maintenance yard, but with the train arriving in the lower siding.

 

Matt - I didn't want to swap the oil & maintenance yards around as thinking I could have some sizable oil tanks in half relief along the back on the layout.

 

BUT this does add quite a bit more track..... possibly too much???

 

As always, thoughts & comments would be appreciated.

 

Thanks

[Flying Pig]

Had a quick play, mainly to replace the symmetric three throw turnouts which I'm not keen on.  They were used on the prototype, but weren't that common and I think would mostly have gone by the 90s (now awaiting a flood of posts telling me why I'm wrong...).  I've also reduced the ballast sidings to one long one to address the overcrowding you alluded to.

 

[sdw7300]

Thanks Simon.

 

I must confess I'm not hugely devoted to the 3-ways, and two 'normal' turnouts will be cheaper! The 3-ways were to maximise siding lengths, but that's less of an issue now.

 

Many thanks for taking the time.

 

Sam

[Nickinwestwales]

Hi Sam-Simon & yourselfs rework is pretty much how I was seeing things-Take the point that your take does start to lose some of the space at the left end which Simons version addresses quite neatly-I think I would extend the locoshed H/shunt as much as possible in order to allow multi loco lashups on & off and to allow the 08 to feed tanks into the fuel point-could be modelled as truncated with the remainder buried under ballast heaps with extreme weathered track poking through here & there.

Hadnt thought of the top siding as the shunter kip,but see how it would work-the little demon in me is still hanging out for that as a revenue siding,especially as it faces the other way to the rest of the yard ( gotta love a nice complex shunt ).

Good point about the half relief tanks-would be much better suited to large tank loads in & out-how about just having the track nearest the tanks rigged for loading and running cuts of 3 100t`s at a time-with the outgoing ones needing to be shunted across to the 2nd siding to make space for the incoming loads....

As well as bulk trains to the ballast and oil yards I can see an `as req` trip to service the factory spur,loco fuel,odd vans of spares for the depot and single wagon loads(machinery etc on a flat ??)to the P.W yd-maybe an end loading ramp.

One other point-are we talking analog or DCC here ? appreciate this is a first layout and no doubt budget is tight ,but looks like a marvellous design to get to grips with the new order ( am thinking of dipping a toe in that particular pond myself,so is of interest)

Anyway-enjoying the evolutionary process here-keep at it,all the best mate

Nick

[Flying Pig]

I think I would extend the locoshed H/shunt as much as possible in order to allow multi loco lashups on & off and to allow the 08 to feed tanks into the fuel point-could be modelled as truncated with the remainder buried under ballast heaps with extreme weathered track poking through here & there

 

 

[sdw7300]

Thanks both. I'm really liking where this is heading.

 

I'm analogue at the moment, but agree, this would be better in DCC. Better get saving I think....

[Nickinwestwales]

Simon-Just exactly so dear boy

 

Sam-R.E DCC-Have been checking Evilbay lately with a view to my own masterplan:-With Hornby`s new `Railmaster` platform -which uses their Elite control as an interface,I`m guessing that S/H Select units are gonna start showing up priced to walk as people upgrade -get one of those in the can for later on,build the layout for Analogue (looks like 4 feeds with live frogs),chip up 1 loco at a time until you are ready to make the change-understand `chippers` will run happily on ye olde D.C.........

Delighted you are open to DCC idea-could really bring the thing to life -would open up 2 man running sessions- A shed master handling light engine arr/deps & a yard master taking care of the trip workings-of course it is a slippery slope,before you know it ,it will be sound chips,multiple lighting modules,yard lights (for `night` running to accentuate the loco lights).................

Only experience of DCC,a short demo from an old pal who has a Select- I found it very user friendly ( and I am far from techno minded ) -I understand they have had some bad press but I would be happy to have one ,certainly as a starter platform-I use a Gaugemaster inertia/brake twin unit and found it a very simple mental shift from one to `tother-with the added comfort blanket of a big red STOP button-interested to hear your thoughts

ATB

Nick

[Flying Pig]

Indulge me.  This one has a single long siding to display your TEAs and an additional short siding for the civil engineer, with a loading bank between it and the loco release (and an end-loading ramp too if you wish).  The business with the single slip allows shunting of all the sidings without blocking access to the stabling point/TMD.

 

[sdw7300]

Simon-Just exactly so dear boy

 

Sam-R.E DCC-Have been checking Evilbay lately with a view to my own masterplan:-With Hornby`s new `Railmaster` platform -which uses their Elite control as an interface,I`m guessing that S/H Select units are gonna start showing up priced to walk as people upgrade -get one of those in the can for later on,build the layout for Analogue (looks like 4 feeds with live frogs),chip up 1 loco at a time until you are ready to make the change-understand `chippers` will run happily on ye olde D.C.........

Delighted you are open to DCC idea-could really bring the thing to life -would open up 2 man running sessions- A shed master handling light engine arr/deps & a yard master taking care of the trip workings-of course it is a slippery slope,before you know it ,it will be sound chips,multiple lighting modules,yard lights (for `night` running to accentuate the loco lights).................

Only experience of DCC,a short demo from an old pal who has a Select- I found it very user friendly ( and I am far from techno minded ) -I understand they have had some bad press but I would be happy to have one ,certainly as a starter platform-I use a Gaugemaster inertia/brake twin unit and found it a very simple mental shift from one to `tother-with the added comfort blanket of a big red STOP button-interested to hear your thoughts

ATB

Nick

 

I'm very tempted to go DCC - my main reason against is cost (& faff of chipping loco's) but if I can pick up a cheap Hornby Select I can, as you suggest, dip my toe in the DCC pond without too much expense. I originally only had older loco's so would need to hard wire, however the latest three are all DCC ready so popping in a decoder should be easy.

 

A bit of searching on the DCC section of RMweb suggests going for the best DCC system you can afford as you'll only want to replace an entry level one at a later date, but for my requirements I think a cheap second hand Select will do me in the short to medium term. 

 

 

Indulge me.  This one has a single long siding to display your TEAs and an additional short siding for the civil engineer, with a loading bank between it and the loco release (and an end-loading ramp too if you wish).  The business with the single slip allows shunting of all the sidings without blocking access to the stabling point/TMD.

 

sdw730d.png

 

Simon - consider yourself indulged! I see what you mean about not blocking the TMD entrance whilst shunting. Once I have built the base board I will print a few of these at 1:1 so I can get a proper feel for them. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

 

Cheers

Sam

[MattWallace]

If it helps, I purchased a Bachmann ezcommand to play with DCC and within weeks I joined merg And started soldering my command buc together.

 

I now have complete computer control over my layout and for less than £100!

[Nickinwestwales]

Evening gents :-Simon-see where you are at with the revised plan-certainly more fluid operationally, but for my two pennorth its starting to lose the spacious feel of the original which is part of the attraction for me-also I wonder if a facility with that little traffic would warrant such a complex formation..??-No intention to disparage,merely an opinion.. 

 

Matt-Good to have an input from someone who has walked the walk on this-

 

Sam-If you have 3 ready to plug & play (plus 1 unconverted running on address 0) seems to me you are half way there-certainly sufficient to give a taste for the system-must confess,its the part I am dreading-hard-wiring 70 plus locos (although suspect a lot of those wont be suitable) is just too ghastly to contemplate (And thats without the complete re-wire of my favourite bass guitar)-but hey-how hard can it be--If I can just make the solder stick to the wires instead of me...........

 

Enjoy the weekend chaps

ATB

Nick

[sdw7300]

Morning folks

 

Sorry I've been a bit quiet - I have been busy trying to clear some room in the garage but this has involved rearranging part of the garden to create space to move one of my log sheds, which has freed up space for a bike shed, which will allow the bikes to be moved out of the garage.... Anyway, back to the layout plans, I think the one Nick posted in #14 is my favourite. Should allow plenty of operational interest without the layout being too track heavy and without to many straight lines.  

 

Nick & Matt - you may have got me into trouble.... I think I'm going to "have to" go DCC on this layout. I do quite enjoy the electronics side (seems alot of people on here don't!) so the ability to play with some of the MERG kits appeals. I'm currently looking at an NCE PowerCab starter kit. It seems to get good reviews. 

 

When I eventually get room (& time) to start the baseboards, I'll start a proper layout thread.

 

Many thanks for the advice so far.

Sam

[MattWallace]

Nick - you may have got me into trouble.... I think I'm going to "have to" go DCC on this layout. I do quite enjoy the electronics side (seems alot of people on here don't!) so the ability to play with some of the MERG kits appeals. I'm currently looking at an NCE PowerCab starter kit. It seems to get good reviews. 

 

It's defintely worth doing the MERG stuff, I've documented what I've done so far (along with approximate costs) at the following posts from my old layout:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-2&do=findComment&comment=818579

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-3&do=findComment&comment=838191

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-3&do=findComment&comment=842852

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-3&do=findComment&comment=885539

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-4&do=findComment&comment=897632

 

If you like electronics (as I do) It can be significatnly cheaper to go down the MERG route even if it does take more time...

 

Matt

[sdw7300]

It's defintely worth doing the MERG stuff, I've documented what I've done so far (along with approximate costs) at the following posts from my old layout:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-2&do=findComment&comment=818579

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-3&do=findComment&comment=838191

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-3&do=findComment&comment=842852

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-3&do=findComment&comment=885539

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/57099-blockwall-junction/page-4&do=findComment&comment=897632

 

If you like electronics (as I do) It can be significatnly cheaper to go down the MERG route even if it does take more time...

 

Matt

 

 

Thanks Matt

 

I remember reading about your electronic exploits as you were building them - V useful to have links on one place.

 

Cheers

Sam

[ess1uk]

this looks like it will be a very interesting layout when built

[sdw7300]

this looks like it will be a very interesting layout when built

Thanks ess1uk

 

Progress is glacial. I have nearly cleared the space at the end of the garage & last night, started a cut list for the boards. Once I start constructing boards I'll set up a thread in the layout section.

 

Cheers

Sam