Sir Madog Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 I have designed quite a number of layouts in recent years, most of them for friends, but when it comes to develop a track plan for my own layout, I have reached the end of my wits. It has to be a small layout, roundy-rounder style. The baseboard I have is 600mm by 1,800mm and I don´t have room for much more than that. The setting I´d like to have is a small station (actually, more of just a halt) on the double track mainline in the picturesque Rhine Valley. Here is what I have come up with so far: I quite like it, but not 100% - a few remaining second thoughts keep me from starting on the layout. Any idea what I could improve? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Could you expand the siding into a loop so you can hold trains there? Perhaps add a second siding or the loop plus 1/2 sidings. I don't think there is much with the space you have without filling the board with track and you will lose the Rhine scenery which will detract from what you desire. I've seen this layout before and I think if I am right this is the improved version with less water, I don't think you want to lose any more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted December 10, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2014 Given that Germany has right-hand running, it seems a bit strange that there is a facing point into a short dead-end siding rather than a loop/double-ended siding. I'm not convinced that the topic is right. The long trains typical of the Rhine valley won't look right on such a short visible section. Perhaps move to another steep sided German river valley with single track, a loop and short trains? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 10, 2014 Author Share Posted December 10, 2014 I'm not convinced that the topic is right. The long trains typical of the Rhine valley won't look right on such a short visible section. Joseph-Pestell - I think that´s exactly what gave me this uneasy feeling, without being able to put it into words. Thank you for this valuable input! I was thinking to relocate the layout´s setting to the Mosel or Elbe River, but that´s no help either. I know I should select a different theme, but my brain seems to be blank at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 10, 2014 Author Share Posted December 10, 2014 If I were to start negotiations with SWMBO on additional reals estate, say 3 ft. in extra length, I could build the layout like this: Would this length be sufficient to capture the feeling I am aiming at? Maximum train length would be the equivalent of 18 4-axle tank cars plus loco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted December 10, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2014 I am sure that in some of the hillier parts of Germany you could find a single track branch running alongside a river or a lake and a steep-sided valley/gorge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 If I were to start negotiations with SWMBO on additional reals estate, say 3 ft. in extra length, I could build the layout like this: Would this length be sufficient to capture the feeling I am aiming at? Maximum train length would be the equivalent of 18 4-axle tank cars plus loco. A 4 axle tank car is approx 90mm in n (88mm for Fleischmann http://www.fleischmann.de/en/product/227163-0-0-11-1-0-0-003001/products.html ) so 18 x 88 = 1584mm. Plus loco at another 122mm (121.5 for http://www.fleischmann.de/en/product/225764-0-0-0-0-0-0-002002/products.html ) Total = 1706mm = 1.706m = 6 feet (give or take 4 or 5 inches) So if you want to see the entire train with space to spare either end (shall we say - a train's length either end) thats 18 feet or just under 5 1/2 metres. So if the original layout is 1800mm/6ft long and the second is 2700mm/9ft long things may end up looking fairly cramped. May I be bold and ask what your aims are for the layout? I'm sure there is a solution, after all the definition of a problem is that we have the right answer, except that it's with the wrong question.......... Good luck! Eric edited for my appalling maths Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Further to my rule of three - warning - unsupported personal opinion ahead! I suggested a panorama of 3 x the maximum train length purely out of the aesthetics of having a train appear from somewhere, then take centre stage, and then leave the stage. This sort of proportion seems the minimum if one wants to focus the eye on the moving train and have some time to study it before it disappears. There's probably a PhD in this somewhere but I have a funny feeling that a lesser ratio than 3:1 may prove disappointing. Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share Posted December 11, 2014 Eric, I am pretty much hooked on the theme - a double track mainline "snaking" through the picturesque Rhine (or Mosel, or Elbe) Valley. I´d like to watch fairly long trains in a beautiful scenery and I am not so keen about shunting operation, hence the roundy-rounder. The absolute maximum I can get is a length of 2.80 m - anything longer would obstruct a window and that´s a no no with my wife. A single track mainline is not really appealing to me - maybe I had too many of these in my past 50 years in the hobby. I am sure there must be a better idea around to capture the atmosphere I am aiming at, but it has not yet come to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim H Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Further to my rule of three - warning - unsupported personal opinion ahead! I suggested a panorama of 3 x the maximum train length purely out of the aesthetics of having a train appear from somewhere, then take centre stage, and then leave the stage. This sort of proportion seems the minimum if one wants to focus the eye on the moving train and have some time to study it before it disappears. There's probably a PhD in this somewhere but I have a funny feeling that a lesser ratio than 3:1 may prove disappointing. Eric There's an opposite school of thought, used by American modellers, that suggests using viewing angles to make it impossible to see the whole train at one time, to disguise the fact the fact that the train is well under scale length. The "Visible panorama must be 3x train lengh" is fine if you either have a lot of space or prefer short branch-line trains,but when neither of those things are true... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 There's an opposite school of thought, used by American modellers, that suggests using viewing angles to make it impossible to see the whole train at one time, to disguise the fact the fact that the train is well under scale length. The "Visible panorama must be 3x train lengh" is fine if you either have a lot of space or prefer short branch-line trains,but when neither of those things are true... Yes I agree, and I was vaguely heading towards that conundrum. I followed the rather classical assumptions that the layout would be fairly low - 4ft high to rail top or under for a "birds eye" view. This is in my view one of the bug bears of n gauge modellers - But I'd rather not start an argument about baseboard height here! As depth is fairly limited and even a snaking track is not going to be easy I'd suggest going for an eye level view so that one is drawn away from train length simply because ones field of vision is less if one looks at something from the side rather than from above. Some of these differing perspectives can be seen in the video clip below. Where the higher the layout the more focussed the view. It also shows where excessive curves can actually hinder rather than help with the illusion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=garIK8kI6uo Kirkham Abbey in 2mm scale is in my view a perfect example of getting the height right. I saw it at Warley and was happy to compliment the owner on "getting it right". The viewing perspective was spot on! http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/album/2362-kirkham-abbey-n-gauge/ and here at 2:14 onwards https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmSjPPVF89g This then raises the obvious question - for which I have no answer - as to how high is going to be right. However it gets harder to count the number of wagons or coaches after 6 or 7, and the higher the rail the less the length counts. Never mind the width - feel the quality................ I think the point I was trying to make is exactly as stated - we have long trains and little space. Eric edit to correct time marker for video clip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share Posted December 11, 2014 I agree that baseboard height is quite essential for the looks of a layout. Mine will be fairly high up, close to eye level, when I am sitting down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 I agree that baseboard height is quite essential for the looks of a layout. Mine will be fairly high up, close to eye level, when I am sitting down. In that case you may have found the solution. Especially if the view is from front three quarter, like most train photographs tend to be. After all I'm guessing that is the sort of view that is already in your minds eye? Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 If you are maximum length of baseboard and want a double track sweeping line with long trains then perhaps you need to amend your scale. How about z scale, its a little more expensive but you let you see the sort of vista you are after. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share Posted December 11, 2014 If you are maximum length of baseboard and want a double track sweeping line with long trains then perhaps you need to amend your scale. How about z scale, its a little more expensive but you let you see the sort of vista you are after. I just got out of On30 in favor of N scale. I already bought some locos and rolling stock, as well as track. Changing scale again is therefore no option for me. I think I have to forget the idea of having prototypical train lengths of up to 40 cars or 10 to 12 passenger cars. Still no clue which way to go ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim H Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 One suggestion - Use Fleischmann curved points in the fiddle yard. The inner radius is too tight for most British-outline stock, but RtR German stock should be fine. This will give you longer roads in the fiddle yard, probably a clear 4', enough for 7-coach trains rather than 5. Design the sceney to be viewed from track level, and use a couple of tallish buildings in front of the tracks as view blocks to stop the eye taking in the whole train. It's a compromise, but everything's a compromise if you're trying to represent a main line in that sort of space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 I just got out of On30 in favor of N scale. I already bought some locos and rolling stock, as well as track. Changing scale again is therefore no option for me. I think I have to forget the idea of having prototypical train lengths of up to 40 cars or 10 to 12 passenger cars. Still no clue which way to go ... I've usually found that by the time a train has reached 6 or 7 coaches or 9 or 10 wagons I've normally lost count. I allow myself to be so deceived because it helps me to enjoy the hobby. Have you tried a test track to see what length trains you can actually get away with? Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share Posted December 11, 2014 Eric - just by pure math, 15 cars should easily fit the bill. That leaves a little stretch of open track between the tunnels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 16, 2014 Author Share Posted December 16, 2014 I spent the past days looking for alternative ideas, but I seem to be too attached to the theme to abandon it. Negotiations with SWMBO resulted in an allocation of a little more space for the layout, which now can be 2,800mm by 600mm. In HO scale, this would be well over 5 meters in length, certainly not a small layout anymore. "On paper", the llayout pla now looks like this: The fiddle yard could be a little bigger to store more trains, but those 600mm depth are cast in concrete! Now I have to figure out how to build the baseboard - it needs to be done in two segments for ease of transportation and lightweight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyMay Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 OK, so what did we say before about extending the scenery over the fiddle yard? And are we really sure about the facing point on scene? (Remember trains in Germany all run on the wrong side, like their cars). Although I'm not too familiar with German practice I do suspect that a trailing point would be better. Similarly, for reversing trains in the fiddle yards, trailing crossovers on each end allow trains to (say, enter UP yard from UP line, reverse and crossover onto DOWN line). Hidden facing turnouts don't seem to be a particularly great idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 17, 2014 Author Share Posted December 17, 2014 TonyMay - thanks for reminding me! I guess I got a little too enthusiastic about the plan now evolving that I simply forgot these issues. While the facing point is not really an issue, it is still better to have a trailing point at the stub end track, which will have little operational importance. The track will only occasionally hold a work train (track inspection unit). It is better to have that train travel beyond the point ans than back up into the storage track. I have also incorporated another crossover into the plan, but will leave the backscene as it is now. I don´t want the staging tracks to be covered. Extending the scenery over those tracks would not result in much of a gain, anyway. Along the middle part of the Rhine Valley, the tracks usually are quite close to the cliffs and the villages between the track and the river. This is the current edition of the plan: Edit: Looking at the paln, I think I will exchange the location of the crossovers.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Sorry to appear dense, but what is the siding for? Bearing in mind the space around it and no access to it by road. As for crossovers I'm wondering if the one you have bottom left could be mirrored at bottom right? Since the ones in the fiddle yard could be a bit of a "fiddle" to use. Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 17, 2014 Author Share Posted December 17, 2014 The siding is used for storing a work train. The Rhine Valley line is one of the most frequented lines in Germany, so you see quite a lot of maintenance crews along the line. The points I use are Minitrix points with an attached point motor- certainly not the best choice, but that´s what I have. The point on the siding is a Peco Insulfrog point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maunsel Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 The siding is used for storing a work train. The Rhine Valley line is one of the most frequented lines in Germany, so you see quite a lot of maintenance crews along the line. The points I use are Minitrix points with an attached point motor- certainly not the best choice, but that´s what I have. The point on the siding is a Peco Insulfrog point. All of which makes sense. On a totally personal note - for me the Rhine line is summed up by the 1970's, TEE's and apfelsaft from the buffet trolley. Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Madog Posted December 17, 2014 Author Share Posted December 17, 2014 Eric - the trip down the Rhine Valley always marked the beginning of those wonderful vacation with my parents in my childhood days. My dad got his first car in 1966, and up until that year, we took the train to reach our vacation hamlet. Switzerland was the favorite location then - believe it or not, families could afford a vacation in that country in the 1860´s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.