Harlequin

Here's a quick sketch of a possible setup: Lots of room for scenery behind Two "fiddle roads" front right: main line and headshunt Run round loop starts right after fiddle yard for maximum length. Run round movement uses fiddle yard - and that's fine, because it's part of the scene! Curving platform can handle 2 60ft coaches Suggestion: Goods shed at front with loading doors open to the viewer so you can look inside. See the recent photos in Little Muddle. (Imagine that the yard is mainly off scene at the front of the layout.) Coal staithes behind shed?

The problem with the fiddle yard is that it takes up so much space. It cramps the rest of the scene and it isn't good to look at, even though you need it to be easily accessible. What if the "fiddle yard" was part of the scene, at the front right? Just a track or a pair of tracks that are fully ballasted and weathered etc. The industry or the engine shed could be behind it. So when you look at the layout, the full 4.2m would look great - a complete scene. To use the fiddle yard you just place locos and wagons on from storage manually and drive them into the scene (and vice versa). To give the FY a true sense of being somewhere special that trains come from and go to, it's marked off by simple scenic breaks, like maybe your overbridge or a level crossing, or whatever and with a fence behind it. The rule is you're only allowed to touch your rolling stock when it has driven into the FY area. It might be a good idea to have the rolling stock storage just below the right hand end of the layout, so they don't have far to go. If you didn't want to handle the stock so much you could possibly use scenic cassettes (@Chimer's idea!) but in 7mm scale they might be unwieldy - that would need more thought. I haven't drawn it yet but that should, fingers crossed, give more room in the layout for the station platform and most importantly, more room for the goods shed and it's yard.

I plotted something to scale using Peco Code 124 parts and assuming a 3 road 1200mm sector plate to check what fits: This is just a quick hack up and there are no doubt better ways to set it out, but: You can see that two 60ft coaches can fit within the clearance points (the red-ish circles). The throw of the sector plate brings it close to the industry track. Not much room for the goods shed, though.

Well... You are trying to squeeze a lot into the space at that scale... Some serious compromises will be needed.

Hi again Amanda, Do you really need passenger facilities? What if the layout was just a goods yard? Then your goods shed would be "centre stage", the focus of the layout, you wouldn't have to allow for the (relatively) big 60ft coaches and you'd have more room for goods sidings. And you could still have all the non-railway ephemera around the outside, of course.

Or plan it in the computer where you can use electronic versions of the Peco templates and rolling stock, you don't need the full size space available and the templates won't blow away...

I'm thinking Hemyock (again) - a bit like the Rockfield design I did recently. (Run round further Up the line than the platform and in the curve.) But I think we're all on the same basic wavelength: Trying to do something a little bit different than the Universal BLT...

Hi, Combining some of the thoughts above you could retain the goods shed but make it low relief at the far left hand side of the layout. Thus, you still have a shed with track notionally running through it, it's just that the door is perpetually closed and you only ever see vans stood in front of it. Then you don't have to leave room for road vehicles to access the shed because that happens off-scene and there's more yard space in front of the shed for your yard crane. Access to the fiddle yard is a definite worry. You need to be absolutely sure that you will be able to operate it as required in that position. Just assuming or hoping that it will be OK could lead to disappointment. Where will locos and rolling stock be stored when they are not on the layout? (The answer to that might make a difference to the fiddle yard design.) Is there room to widen the layout in the middle so that front edge bows out by, say, 100-150mm? That would give you a bit more area for sidings and/or scenery if it was possible.

No, but you can turn the cassettes around!

Hi Keith, Here's a rough outline suggestion: The two bottom boards are 3ft2in by 2ft, the two side boards are 2ft11in by 2ft and the fiddle yard board is just under 4ft long but only 18in wide. (Sorry @AndyB, my earlier thought didn't quite work out!) I'm suggesting a cassette table fiddle yard because: It avoids a turnout fan. Cassettes allow rolling stock to be moved around the house as easily as the layout itself and safely stored. You don't have to re-rail your stock, you just unpack and connect cassettes, so set up time is quicker. The thinner cassette table allows the operating well to be wider. No visible tight radii.

And so the best RTR "14xx" is... A Bachmann 64xx.

Approximate 3ft2in by 2ft modules seem to divide the plan space up very neatly. (No need to make them all the same, as you say, but it's more systematic if you do and they are quicker to build.) They could be constructed from 6mm ply as cross-braced open-frames, which would be both lightweight and very strong and rigid. But the baseboards must serve the layout design and that's the most intriguing part of the puzzle...

Hi Keith, The new arrangement sounds very sensible. What is your preferred method of getting into the operating well (if there is one)? Would you accept a duck-under if it made the best layout design?

The statement leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Can someone who knows what is going on tell us why this has happened? That would cut off a lot of speculative nonsense.

On the Moretonhampstead branch, and I suspect many others, the track rose from the mainline at more or less sea level to the town on the moor. So down was Up and up was Down.

Adam, have you checked how long your platforms will be with those point formations at either end? Will a decent length passenger train stand fully alongside the platform without fouling the points at either end?

It's superb! I would say that you have performed something of a miracle to fit this so neatly into the space but I know that it's really the result of a lot of hard work and fine tuning. I like the new angle at the bottom, which eases the corner curve and gives the goods yard more room. Only question is about the turnouts on the access bridge: If the bridge is a lifting flap the proximity to the edge might be a worry unless you have a cunning plan in mind. Have you thought about the landscape profile? It would be lovely to see some undulations, especially if the landscape could fall away from the track somewhere to avoid the billiard table look.

On the original question: It looks like you’ve got room to widen some of the corner curves. You’ll have to re-lay the track across the lifting section so that it is still turning when it crosses the gaps. Luckily the flap seems to be wide enough to accommodate the curve. You will need to fix the tracks securely either side of the gaps so that they always line up. Most people do this by soldering the rails to something solidly fixed to the baseboards - either brass screws or copper clad PCB.

I tried all sorts of combinations! I found the formation with slips was just too straight and the curves at the ends that were needed to get the same net angle made the overall radius much larger.

I was looking for ways to combine things and the trailing crossover that was already in the station plan looked like a good opportunity to do that so that the main lines could turn sharper under the high level station building. I did have the "implausible junction" completely symmetrical at one stage but it throws the main lines in a very different direction, like this: I think that's the tightest it's possible to get that formation to turn without relying on the turning routes through slips in the main line, which I really didn't want to do! (It's a short crossing, two small radius turnouts and six curved turnouts.) It might still work. There's enough room above. It would mean more hidden running and less room for scenery behind the low level part of the station. Then Chris would have to decide if he wants to keep the crossover in the station as well as the one in the junction.

Do you see this control (circled)? It's not explicitly called "follow this topic" but rather it controls all things related to following and I think it's the one you want.

Hi Chris, Here's what I've come up with so far. It's not fully worked out and some things might be a bit awkward but I think this is a good point to show it to you. One of my big ideas came to nothing so it's no less complicated than your clever plan, which it is heavily based on. The major concept of this plan is to combine the elements of your plan wherever possible so that there are fewer separate parts and more open running. The goods yard headshunt continues into the countryside scene. It won't look too "urban" out there because it's just a parallel track with a rusty buffer stop at the end! I've broken the rules slightly with a short bit of 2ft main line radius between the station scene and the country scene. It isn't fully covered, just obscured by the road overbridge. Helices are purple and they cross in the top right corner. (I know they look close to the walls but that's because of the backscene boards. May need some adjustment.) The station scene can be wide because you have access from both inside and outside. Goods yard can cope with long trains but the layout could probably be improved!!! Note that pulling forward on the main line before setting back into the yard is all done in the scenic area - great fun! There's a passing loop around the branch platform for a bit of extra flexibility. The "implausible junction" is hidden under the high level station and associated town scene. This allows the countryside run to be really simple with nothing untoward going on. Here's the top level and the helices with all the scenery removed: I imagine that the scene above the "implausible junction" would lift off somehow for access. The "implausible junction" is like yours but swapped over and the take-off lines are allowed to cross to make the formation more compact. By putting the junction in the curve there are no reverse curves in any of the routes through - they all just keep turning the same way. Note that because there's no visible running between station and junction you can make both main line and branch line trains disappear and appear like magic now! You can see that one of the crossovers for the junction is combined with a trailing crossover that was already in your plan, between the platforms. So anticlockwise movements up from the storage level appear on scene briefly running wrong-road. There are various ways to justify this and I hope its an acceptable compromise. (Actually I think that crossover could be hidden with a bit of fiddling.) I've used R3 and R4 curves in the hidden junction area and the helices. Point motors for the junction would be surface mounted to avoid possible interference withe the storage level below. This can be done because the junction is hidden... Baseboard shapes are just indicative sketches, need to be rationalised. The helices (purple) descend from the junction, clockwise and anti-clockwise down to the storage level. Here's the storage level: The same helices (purple) are shown on this plan as well. Simple set of 7 long storage loops. (I know the turnout fans could be better!) The loops are offset and use the corner curve to help even out the helix lengths a bit. Long loop at the front for easier fiddling. The helices can be used as headshunts for reforming trains without them appearing on scene. Nothing really done yet about turning locos... Very simple baseboards at this level! The thin baseboard on the North side makes the duck under a bit easier.

Well, yes and no, but I was wrong to snipe at DK's Settrack if that's what he really wants to use. It was only meant to be a gentle hint. Maybe it came out wrong. Sorry.

Making something beautiful and using up spare parts are not always comfortable bed-fellows but you might be lucky. Maybe some other reader will find it useful.

Yes, the buzzing is the characteristic sound of a very unhappy DC motor being given a high-power AC signal (the DCC signal) because there is no DCC decoder between the motor and the track. It shouldn't have done any permanent damage if you didn't have it turned on for too long. While you're buying decoders (I agree with the others that Zimo are a good choice) buy some spare ones to replace any Lais chips you have...