Virney Junction - Scenery ongoing

[Andrew P]

Thanks Andy

 

I've exchanged posts with John about his system. It largely involves the same wagons going to the same places even if the number of times they do varies unless I've totally misunderstood it.

 

John is happy with it but it lacks a degree of variance for me. In an ideal world I'd like to devise a consignment based system - which is more prototypical - with all the variables that that entails but my initial thinking around that idea seemed to be a bit paper heavy and possibly too complicated for visitors to grasp.

 

I'm still wondering if I'm heading down the wrong track and the problem that I have with trying to arrive at something close to prototypical operation is destined to failure whilst I'm the person that signals the trains, drives the engines and plans the wagon movements. Perhaps that's why I find repeatedly operating the same club layout more acceptable.

 

Like you I maybe destined to have smaller layouts and change them from time to time when I get bored with them.

That's what I'm thinking again, for prototypical operation a Fiddle Yard to destination is the only way, as a roundy roundy will get you back to doing that and NOT OPPERATION, even Whittaker St is to big really, so small is maybe my way forward, less stock, less track, less points, less wiring, less expense, MORE time running trains.

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks Andy

 

I've exchanged posts with John about his system. It largely involves the same wagons going to the same places even if the number of times they do varies unless I've totally misunderstood it.

 

John is happy with it but it lacks a degree of variance for me. In an ideal world I'd like to devise a consignment based system - which is more prototypical - with all the variables that that entails but my initial thinking around that idea seemed to be a bit paper heavy and possibly too complicated for visitors to grasp.

 

I'm still wondering if I'm heading down the wrong track and the problem that I have with trying to arrive at something close to prototypical operation is destined to failure whilst I'm the person that signals the trains, drives the engines and plans the wagon movements. Perhaps that's why I find repeatedly operating the same club layout more acceptable.

 

Like you I maybe destined to have smaller layouts and change them from time to time when I get bored with them.

I think the basic premise of your system was very good - it had the touch of realism that many other systems do not capture because it was based far more on the idea of traffic rather than on wagons.

 

When it comes to a railway (model) we are inevitably jacks of all trades unless involved with a club layout which is big enough to split roles although even on a smaller home layout roles could be split.  But that is about running the trains rather than deciding what is in them.  Maybe the answer - or at least a partial one - is how you approach your 'operating day' - that being a 'day' in terms of your miniature world rather than another kind.  Thus You have a basic timetable, plus your other operating restraints/conditions such as how many wagons a train can take or a station/siding can handle.  Then alongside that you 'generate' your traffic for the forthcoming operating day - something your ideas allow to be done with a degree of reality.

 

Then you bring the two together - that's the 'running that day' stage of it.  Now how that works depends on what traffic is about (albeit artificially generated but don't forget it can change during 'the day', to some extent) and the challenge (if that is what you want) is moving the traffic requirements within the constraints of the timetable etc.  Driving the trains and working the signals just become pleasurable incidentals to the 'real' business of moving the traffic.  daft way of looking at it or just a different way of looking at it - I'm not sure but perhaps it's food for some different thoughts?  

[Ray H]

Thanks for those words of wisdom Mike.

 

That's the way I'm heading at the minute (apart from the fact that lunch is nearly ready!).

 

The roundy/roundy idea was largely for test running as I can't bring myself to believe that something that is navigating the same stretch of track repeatedly is actually in the process of making a long journey whereby it eventually ends up back where it started (travelling in the same direction) and that very same place now has to be viewed as somewhere completely different. I've got a rolling road for running stock in if required so the continuous run looks like going.

 

In its place (currently) is a single line terminus to fiddle yard "U" shape design with several sidings for different purposes at the terminus - shades of Hintock - and an intermediate station with a few sidings that will also require shunting. Gone is the multi-level baseboard and the obstructed view of the fiddle yard that would have required train detection (kits to be built).

 

The proposed fiddle yard could be a multi-track turntable with a deck that I can rotate (or swap for another). Alternately it may be a CJF style multi-track cassette that I can lift and turn or swap out. The latter is preferred because access to the various sidings will be via points rather than requiring the turntable alignment to be revised for every train. I can set out the fiddle yard at the start of the session and needn't really interfere with it again until each train has run out and back. Passenger services will largely shuttle back and forth and as DMUs won't need any intervention between trips (although I may have a morning and evening "through coaches" train).

 

That leaves me with a couple of fiddle yard sidings for freight and one for parcels. All I need to do is to either swap the deck over at the start/end of a traffic day or reform the freight stock that is already on the layout.

 

A quick fix would be a shed load (so to speak) of large radius Peco points (as I have the space for them) although I may still go for handmade points and SMP track and accept the resultant delay.

 

I may have a rough sketch to post for discussion later today.

 

Thanks once again.

[Andrew P]

Thanks for those words of wisdom Mike.

 

That's the way I'm heading at the minute (apart from the fact that lunch is nearly ready!).

 

The roundy/roundy idea was largely for test running as I can't bring myself to believe that something that is navigating the same stretch of track repeatedly is actually in the process of making a long journey whereby it eventually ends up back where it started (travelling in the same direction) and that very same place now has to be viewed as somewhere completely different. I've got a rolling road for running stock in if required so the continuous run looks like going.

 

In its place (currently) is a single line terminus to fiddle yard "U" shape design with several sidings for different purposes at the terminus - shades of Hintock - and an intermediate station with a few sidings that will also require shunting. Gone is the multi-level baseboard and the obstructed view of the fiddle yard that would have required train detection (kits to be built).

 

The proposed fiddle yard could be a multi-track turntable with a deck that I can rotate (or swap for another). Alternately it may be a CJF style multi-track cassette that I can lift and turn or swap out. The latter is preferred because access to the various sidings will be via points rather than requiring the turntable alignment to be revised for every train. I can set out the fiddle yard at the start of the session and needn't really interfere with it again until each train has run out and back. Passenger services will largely shuttle back and forth and as DMUs won't need any intervention between trips (although I may have a morning and evening "through coaches" train).

 

That leaves me with a couple of fiddle yard sidings for freight and one for parcels. All I need to do is to either swap the deck over at the start/end of a traffic day or reform the freight stock that is already on the layout.

 

A quick fix would be a shed load (so to speak) of large radius Peco points (as I have the space for them) although I may still go for handmade points and SMP track and accept the resultant delay.

 

I may have a rough sketch to post for discussion later today.

 

Thanks once again.

And like me now, Easy doorway access with a cup of tea.

[Ray H]

Here's my first attempt.

I may tweak the curve through the terminus platform slightly.

The terminus plan was more or less lifted from a CJF published plan although the points have been swapped for large radius and the factory at the far end replaces a milk depot & gas works in the original. The latter might actually be re-instated due to the number of coke wagons that I have! There's probably enough room for a couple of wagons at the far end of each siding because there was a level crossing between the buildings and the rest of the station which might be worth retaining.

I've removed the turntable - replacing it with a headshunt for the yard - and wasn't planning any loco facilities at all.

I am undecided about the carriage siding, unsure of whether to leave it as is - it could see service as a parcels platform when not used for berthing coaches - or whether to add something else (yet another factory?) to give me an excuse for even more shunting.

The idea for the through station originated from a plan I saw recently in a magazine. That had a through track with sidings on either side but cleverly arranged by means of a single slip on one side of the running line to facilitate running round. In truth I've deviated so much from that plan that mine now bears little resemblance to what I saw.

I'm less happy with this albeit that it offers further shunting options. I can't make up my mind whether it is the adherence to Peco large radius points (including the curved versions), reaching the fifty piece limit of the free version of AnyRail (which prevents further tweaking on this plan), the presence of even more factories (on what I was thinking might be a rural layout - what else could I have?) or something I can't put my finger on that makes me think there's scope for improvement in this area.

I started with the platform on the curve nearest the terminus followed by the loop (and sidings) and then the bridge but I struggled to get that to fit and accommodate the fiddle yard. Reversing the order makes it fit but I'm not sure that it is the best that I can achieve.

The fiddle yard gives me at least 42" of siding space on all five roads. I could add a couple more sidings in return for reducing the current length of the two shortest sidings. I could curve the far end of those two same sidings inwards slightly to mimic their other end and then I could have all five tracks on a wide cassette that could be (lifted &) turned and/or interchanged with something similar.

My current thinking is to use a Peco loco lift to move locos from one end of a train to the other in the fiddle yard but otherwise leaves trains alone during an operating session.

One idea not completely ruled out at present is a five track DCC controlled sector plate. Ray (of Camel Quay) has a thread doing similar with a turntable and a sector plate's movements aren't that different. This would remove the need for the fiddle yard pointwork which would allow the through station platform to be moved nearer to the fiddle yard. This, in turn, may make the through station's loop & sidings look a little less contrived.

This plan requires 20 (large radius) points and almost thirty yards of track. Do I go down the Peco route or do I start building points? Edited June 7, 2015 by Ray H

[Andrew P]

Ray, I will give it some thought for you later and give some feedback if its any help.

[Ray H]

With apologies to anyone already contemplating a response to the above, here's a slight re-take on the through station. There will be trap points where appropriate - they're not shown here because I've used up my 50 track pieces in AnyRail!

 

I've also replaced the factory with a brewery at the terminus which will provide scope for even more wagon types. Likewise, having just been through my stock of Metcalfe kits that I've had since they invented cardboard (!), the carriage siding could become a warehouse (to use up another kit).

 

I've removed one of the factory buildings at the through station to stop it looking too urban. I can have a second loading point on the remaining building to provide a replacement place to load/unload a wagon.

 

I reckon I can have four or five different wagon "destinations" at the through station (incl. at its factory) with between six and eight at the terminus. That's clearly enough to justify a couple of freights per day at least!

 

I might be able to replace the bridge with a crossing keeper's house or large tree and a little more plain line if I can get an automated sector plate idea to work. That would provide further scope to lengthen the through station loops as well (and maybe the factory siding).

 

I've just costed the (Peco) trackwork for this plan as it stands. It works out at around £350 assuming that I don't recover anything from Wynsloe Road or already have in stock. I could save a chunk of that by building my own points. However, I'd feel obliged to use SMP track and that costs 50% more than Peco so the cost saving would only be about £40 if I have my sums right. It might look better but do I have the patience to wait until I've built those twenty points? Maybe not.

 

The next task (before I spend any money) is to work out a summary of train movements for a day's operation to see how that looks.

[Andrew P]

Much better Ray and nothing really to add other than to say, yes Hand built points would look far nicer, as will SMP Track but (and not being funny mate) at our time of life, I want to see Trains running.

[Brian D]

Hi Ray,

I don't mean at all to be disrespectful but the "planning process" has gone on too long IMHO - time to lay some track and get on with it.  You can obsess too long about the end result.  It's time to "Go For It".  The track plan above in post #155 looks great to me - you have a railway system with two stations and lots of operational potential.  It will be so much easier and quicker to build than the previous plan (post #113?).  Perhaps Mr Peco's track might be the way to go, rather than hand built stuff - quicker to get trains running possibly, although I'm still struggling.

With regard to your latest plan, have you thought about a fiddle yard/scenic bit including a couple of stations/fiddle yard arrangement?  I have taken the liberty of editing your last proposal thus.

Obviously the original FY is shown in black and the new one in red.  I have obviously run rough shod over your sidings in the lower station but hopefully you will catch my drift as it were.  Indeed, a double track link between the two FYs incorporating two stations and siding facilities could be accommodated.

Just my ramblings.

Regards,

Brian. 

[Zomboid]

I like the idea of a "system", rather than just a station. A very similar vein to something I'd like to build some day (though mine will be American HO).

I'm only really replying to get a little star next to the thread so I know to look at it when it updates.

[The Stationmaster]

Ray,

 

Two points on the terminus (either version although I prefer the second one) -

 

1.  There is insufficient siding space for mileage traffic - simplest solution would be to extend the siding you have labelled as 'coal'.  Always worth remembering that in most yards, especially at smaller stations, freight traffic was more likely to be mileage traffic than the few wagons passing through the goods shed.

 

2.  The carriage siding looks rather difficult to shunt as one way or another you run the risk of trapping an engine.  Arriving train is easy enough - unloads passengers and van traffic and inward engine propels stock into siding.  But for a departure - engine draws stock out of siding, then propels out onto the branch, draws stock into the other platform and then runs round (and possibly finally shunts stock back to the bay to load ready for departure).  Nothing at all wrong with that - it happened in real life in at least a vaguely similar and at some places exactly similar fashion but every time you are shunting to & fro on the single line you are preventing another train from approaching the terminus so it would impact on your timetable.

 

As far as the intermediate station is concerned the first plan would be better for shunting the sidings I think.

[Ray H]

I like the idea of a "system", rather than just a station. A very similar vein to something I'd like to build some day (though mine will be American HO).

I'm only really replying to get a little star next to the thread so I know to look at it when it updates.

Welcome on board as they say. And to quote someone else who I know monitors this thread - "Feel free to drop in any time."

 

Brian

 

Thanks for your comments. The baseboard supports for the roundy/roundy are still in place at the open end of the "U" so I could curve the upper track (into the brewery) round, re-instate the lifting flap across the doorway and link into the back of the fiddle yard (or I could forget the link and simply expand the brewery and its siding capacity).

 

I know two fiddle yards would give me more storage space for stock on the layout but it would reduce the shunting capability at the terminus and I think that I prefer the shunting.

 

I'm trying to be reasonably prototypical in my operations and envisage that the best I could probably hope for is the same set of passenger stock shuttling back and forth for much of the day. There might be an odd exception to this so that's two sidings taken up in the FY. The third siding would be for parcels and the remainder for freight. Two of those is probably the limit which is where my five FY sidings come into play. That said, I recently bought an 8F & a 9F for the roundy/roundy layout and am struggling to think how I could justify their use on the new design.

 

As far as planning/building is concerned I've been awake since 2am tossing all sorts of ideas around - mainly for working the points and signals. If I can stay awake this evening I shall make a start on modifying the baseboard frames that I built for the previous plan and may even crack on with the frames for the terminus station later in the week.

 

Mike

 

Thanks for your comments Mike.

 

I'd already given some thought to the way to work the carriage siding. Perhaps I need to have it as a connection off the platform road with a flat crossing across the entry to the bay road.

 

All noted about the mileage traffic. There's probably just room for a further siding alongside the "coal" siding and I could probably add at least another eighteen inches to the length of both. Where would any coal traffic go if I did that?

 

I re-arranged the sidings at the through station to try to move the through station further from the terminus and to enable me to move the platform away from the bridge in case I manage to mechanise the sector plate and can replace the bridge as the scenic break with something else in the space where the points currently are.

 

I can see where you're coming from because the original plan with the trap at the other end of the loop converted into a short headshunt would enable me to shunt the sidings whilst a train was passing on the through line. Leaving the arrangement as it now is would make the inconvenience yet another complexity in the puzzle. However I suppose I could leave the sidings as they are now and add a headshunt on the inside of the curve so that I could berth the train in the loop and shunt the sidings clear of the main line - I'll have to patch two plans together to show that (or buy the full version of AnyRail!).

[georgeT]

Hello Ray, you could have as some have, lots of room to build your dream layout a double track mainline with trains running around it all day long, but the boredom factor will soon drop in, and you would be bored stiff of watching the same train go round and round till you drop off asleep, all it will be is a bigger version of what we all started with a 6x4 baseboard with two trains running round and round forever, The time, effort and money we invest to make our locos and rolling stock look as realalistic as we can with every nut and bolt in the right place, and weathered to perfection, so why not do the same in the operation of the layout, as many others have said, so lay your station as near to the prototype as possible, and have the fiddle yard out of sight to accept the stock and not return again and again and................dropped off again sorry    hahahahaha

[Andrew P]

Ray, if its of any help at all, this is the Goods Yard on our Clubs O Gauge Layout, and has really good operation.

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2015 by Andrew P

[The Stationmaster]

 

Mike

 

Thanks for your comments Mike.

 

I'd already given some thought to the way to work the carriage siding. Perhaps I need to have it as a connection off the platform road with a flat crossing across the entry to the bay road.

 

All noted about the mileage traffic. There's probably just room for a further siding alongside the "coal" siding and I could probably add at least another eighteen inches to the length of both. Where would any coal traffic go if I did that?

 

 

If you keep the carriage siding 'as is' that would definite;y give some 'operating fun'  All you need to think about when connecting it off the main platform line is do you have enough room to stable a train.

 

In our local goods yard (closed a bit over 40 years ago!!) coal traffic and most of the mileage traffic (other than any needing craneage or the cattle dock) was all dealt with on a single long siding - somewhere I have a photo with several ferry vans (Italian I think) various other wagons plus the coal wagons on the stop block end, a good couple of dozen wagons and no doubt great fun to sort for the crew on the trip.  Older photos show the entire road full, quite a sight.  And a reason for suggesting that one is that it has the essential for any mileage siding, room for a road vehicle to turn and room for another to pass when one is at wagonside loading or unloading.  At the baseboard edge you have exactly that sort of space (even if it is in mid-air!).

[Zomboid]

If shunting a goods yard is your thing, how about switching it around, and having the BLT with some rudimentary facilities next to the FY, and the line continuing past there to a larger freight only facility. If its large enough you may even be able to justify the 8/9F showing up.

[Ray H]

Thanks for the various responses.

 

This will certainly be a general operating rather than a solely shunting style layout even though I like the look of that O gauge layout Andy.

 

I enjoy shunting within reason but not to the exclusion of all else because, for me, that's too little of the railway covered. Mike's latest suggestion of a single long mileage siding sure sounds like an option for some frenetic shunting at times. Given that even with all the space that I have I'm probably limited to ten wagons per train if I can't get the DCC operated sector plate idea to work. I can see two trips per day not being enough!

 

One idea I've had to accommodate the two bigger locos is to have a block train that has serviced an industry further back along the branch and just meanders down to the terminus to run round - a good excuse for keeping the through station loop short so it can't run round there! I have ten Presflos that I bought some while ago on impulse and I'd have little excuse to use them otherwise. Maybe one of the FY tracks could be cassette based to allow any such trains to b switched over if the mood takes me - which it may not very often!

 

I think the carriage siding is a has been partly because the bay platform isn't really long enough to match the siding's length. Instead I shall aim for a warehouse alongside the siding. I think the direct link to the main platform track is a better idea.

 

All I need now is to find excuses to run the numerous cattle and coke wagons that I accumulated for Virney Junction (because both were a feature of what went down the branch to Banbury). Does anyone have any ideas what types of wagons would be needed for the brewery other than grain wagons (and please don't suggest making it a Coke factory instead )?

Edited June 8, 2015 by Ray H

[Ray H]

Hi Ray,

. . . time to lay some track and get on with it.  . . .

Honest Guv, my intention for tonight was to start work on modifying those baseboard frames that I had already made to resolve earlier problems as well as make them fit for the new plan. Those frames are where the through station will be. What could be simpler?

 

Alas, I have discovered a significant drawback with the consistent use of Peco's large radius points - the scope for adjusting the length of baseboards to fit around a plan and stay within the more conventional 4' by 2' size is far from easy when a point is over ten inches long and you plan to have several adjoined to each other!

 

The overall baseboard length on that side of the garage is 14½ft and it is looking as though I will need to employ at least one 6ft long board to clear the points at the country end of the station. That means I'll need to start afresh with the frames but it has taken me a couple of hours to be certain that I can't do anything with what went before.

 

Pending some other catastrophe, tomorrow evening will now hopefully be dismantling the old boards because the cross bracing is liable to be re-usable even if the rest is heading to the bin.

 

Hopefully I'll be able to report better progress next time.

[Andrew P]

Thanks for the various responses.

 

This will certainly be a general operating rather than a solely shunting style layout even though I like the look of that O gauge layout Andy.

 

I enjoy shunting within reason but not to the exclusion of all else because, for me, that's too little of the railway covered. Mike's latest suggestion of a single long mileage siding sure sounds like an option for some frenetic shunting at times. Given that even with all the space that I have I'm probably limited to ten wagons per train if I can't get the DCC operated sector plate idea to work. I can see two trips per day not being enough!

 

One idea I've had to accommodate the two bigger locos is to have a block train that has serviced an industry further back along the branch and just meanders down to the terminus to run round - a good excuse for keeping the through station loop short so it can't run round there! I have ten Presflos that I bought some while ago on impulse and I'd have little excuse to use them otherwise. Maybe one of the FY tracks could be cassette based to allow any such trains to b switched over if the mood takes me - which it may not very often!

 

I think the carriage siding is a has been partly because the bay platform isn't really long enough to match the siding's length. Instead I shall aim for a warehouse alongside the siding. I think the direct link to the main platform track is a better idea.

 

All I need now is to find excuses to run the numerous cattle and coke wagons that I accumulated for Virney Junction (because both were a feature of what went down the branch to Banbury). Does anyone have any ideas what types of wagons would be needed for the brewery other than grain wagons (and please don't suggest making it a Coke factory instead )?

Bass / Worthingtons Brewery in Burton on Trent had Ex Cattle Wagons for transporting Ale Cask's, The Tutbury Jinny / Models, (just had a name change this week from Jinny to Models) has Limited Editions produced for them by Dapol.

They would also have needed Coke for the Boilers I would have thought.

[Ray H]

Thanks for that Andy. I do recall recently reading about using cattle wagons for carry beer casks now you mention it.

 

Presumably there'd be grain hoppers as well as the aforementioned coke wagons, the odd open wagon for machinery and no doubt a few vans. This is beginning to sound like a good reason not to dismantle that extra bit of baseboard support (adjacent to where the brewery is going) to leave scope to add a further siding or two in that area in the future.

 

One idea I am toying with is to mount the servos for the points on the front edge of the baseboard and use a thin rod connected between servo horn and the tiebar to move the blades. Mercontrol connections between the two are another option but I've found the nylon tubing used nowadays is more difficult to hold in place.

 

I'm also contemplating having the power bus along the front edge as well. That way there won't be anything under the baseboards so I won't have any need to work underneath them. That in turn means that I can have any length board that I like (to suit turnout placement) and reduce the number of baseboard joins that can present track alignment problems. It also reduces the number of inter-baseboard electrical connections.

 

Anything mounted along the front edge would be covered by a facia board that would only require a few screws to be released if I need to access what's behind.

 

I've got plenty of servos and an old point so I can give that a try to see whether it is a viable option.

[Ray H]

Here's the MK I version of the servo mount (produced using the bits that I had to hand):-

 

 

The wooden packing shown inside the brass angle was originally fitted when I planned to mount the micro-switch (for frog polarity changing) on the angle that supports the servo. However, now that the micro-switch is on the edge of the baseboard the wooden packing piece will no longer be needed.

 

The Mark II version is liable to use 5mm by 5mm brass angle - I've used cut down 10mm for the Mark I version which is all that I had. I might position the servo a few millimetres away from the edge of the baseboard to provide more adjustment capability in the servo horn's turning circle.

 

Ideally I need some 2mm diameter screws for the micro-switch as well.

 

One other option to consider is to solder a short length of rod to and at right-angles to the rod shown in the images and use that to activate the micro-switch lever. This could be an option if I need to operate more than micro-switch with one servo.

 

The operating rod will need to be buried in the underlay and covered as it passes under any running rail if I do use rod rather than wire in tube. Otherwise the rod is liable to get glued when the track is ballasted.

 

The servo controller board (and associated DCC decoder) will all be screwed to the front edge of the baseboard frame where they'll be easy to get to.

 

I did some more calculations with baseboard sizes this morning and the 8ft by 2ft baseboard option is gaining ground.

 

I have a (limited) source of (free) 15mm plywood strips that is ideal for a 60mm deep baseboard framing save that the maximum length is 5ft. I also need to trim a strip off some to make them 60mm wide. I can't see that butt joining two lengths with a six inch long screwed and glued overlapping joining piece will be any weaker than a single piece the full length.

 

I was going to start on a baseboard frame this evening but the servo experiment took longer than envisaged. I still have a yearning to build my own points and this could require minor adjustments to baseboard lengths. I'm going to draw up a Templot plan to see if there is a common size to both options. This won't delay baseboard building too long because the next few days are a bit busy and free time is liable to be at unsociable hours and not when I want to be using power tools.

[Ray H]

I've just placed the order with Marcway for the SMP track, code 75 rail and PCB sleeper strip. Hopefully that will arrive early next week.

 

I hope finalise the Templot plan this evening so that I can then plot out the exact baseboard sizes.

 

I hope to be able to crack on and make the baseboard frames after the weekend.

 

That should see the end of the "heavy" woodwork and enable me to finally sell off the various items of reasonably large woodworking machinery that are currently occupying two thirds of the layout's operating area.

 

I can't see myself manipulating the sheets of plywood whilst those machines are still there so that will give me a chance to start building the turnouts.

 

Watch this space - it may only be a wee bit better than watching paint dry at least for a couple of weeks!

[Andrew P]

Good luck and all the best Ray.

[Ray H]

Thanks Andy.

 

Another evening well spent. The Templot plan (all 70+ pages) is complete so I'll try and print that out over the next day or two so that I can work out the best arrangement of baseboards.

 

T'is a good job I did it because the shapes I had in Templot from when I did the plan for Virney Junction reminded me that I have an 8" wall pillar and a gas pipe that I need to work around.

 

I'd have realised that when I started building but it's better to remember now.

 

Another thing to do off line is to re-think the history behind the line. This time it will have to be completely fictitious but I don't plan to drift too far geographical wise from the local area.

[Ray H]

Part of last evening was spent drafting an email to a colleague whose engineering capabilities I respect. I was seeking his advice on how best to mechanise a sector plate so that I can control it remotely from the other side of the garage.

 

He has yet to reply.

 

I'm not totally committed to the idea because I recognise that I'll be limited to the number of trains that I can pre-prepare in the fiddle yard just like I would with a fan of sidings There's also the chore of devising & building the operating mechanism but that is balanced against the alternative of having to build the relevant number of points for a siding fan.

 

I'd already given some thought to the idea of an exchangeable multi-track cassette instead of the fixed siding fan but discounted this because it would shorten some of the sidings. I am now contemplating simultaneous use of several single track cassettes, each linked to a member of the severely truncated siding fan. This would allow me to pre-prepare any number of trains, swap those that I want to change and yet retain those that I don't wish to change. The number of cassettes is infinitely expandable which is a good idea as I am beginning to develop a scenario for the existence of the "railway". This will provide an excuse to run a multitude of trains during a full session.

 

I've just go time to print off the final (?) Templot plan and gather my tools together before heading to club this evening.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Ray H