Mike K

Hi David, Sorry for the delayed response. It is just a 'one-man' show, but some of this will be computer controlled. I have always preferred the 'signalman' approach to model railways, rather than 'the driver' so my plan, with some help from a mate to set it all up, is to let the computer control the trains (with the exception of shunting in the yard) leaving me to control the signalling. I take your comment on board, but i think its achievable given some 'experience' (read playing!) with a friends layout that has elements of computer control set up the same way. Thanks for the comment on the track bed and gradients. I do need to do some experimenting with these things, especially in respect of the curves and grades around Shepcote Lane on the model. Hi Tony, Thanks for your input, and yes, in the main I agree with your comments. A lot of people I think from reading rmWeb and other forums/magazines, tend to think that computer control takes all the fun away - and i think if its put in control to handle everything, I would probably agree. My thought is to only let it handle part, and even then its automated according to manual actions (which I appreciate is a contradiction in terms!). It does mean that there is more wiring however! But I take your comments on board, food for thought as they say. Mike

Hi Zombold, Sorry dont know your name! Yes i'd agree, I need to do a bit of testing with to establish what works and what doesn't in terms of curving gradients, but i am going to try setting the 'GC' line points further back both at Shepcote North Jn and Broughton Lane Jn, and try moving the Yard end junction up around 6-12 inches to give more more. All the other grades should be fine as they are over a far longer length. In terms of time and money, well yes. But it is intended as a long-term project, but I do take your comments on board. I enjoy a bit of shunting and at other times watching the trains go by, and do enjoy building structures, so part of the thought is that this layout doesn't limit me, it gives different opportunities, depending on what I want to do. Its also possible to leave things running round while I'm doing scenery if required. As for the cost, well once the fiddle yards are done, the rest can be done in stages, as somebody suggested previously. Mike

Evening all, Well i promised I would upload the SCARM plan - i did say it was rough .. certainly needs a lot of work and isnt perfect at the moment. I've also hit the 100 track limit, so need to consider either buy the full version, or laying out the yard as a separate file. Edit: I should add the layout is over three levels to split up the views. Level 0 is baseboard level (Fiddle Yard), Level 1 and Level 2 (Brightside & MML into Sheffield). Rotherham Masborough station sits halfway between Level 1 and Level 2 (hence the 1.5 on the diagram) in order to reduce the climb out of the station on the MML line and the climb from Shepcote Lane on the GC route. Mike

May be something like "Queen's Place"? Interesting way of doing the platforms. What material have you used for the platform sides that are screwed down, or is it just wood that you have cut notches into? If so, can i ask why? Mike.

Jim & SG, Thanks for the comments. Yes the same thoughts have occurred to me, but in some respects I hit two problems. One is that I need to get the Hidden Sidings/Fiddle Yards right from the start because track alterations will be a no-go afterwards, and the second is that doing it in smaller sections could hit problems given the interconnection between lines at Shepcote Lane Junctions. That was one of the reasons that i decided to plan everything on the computer before laying a piece of track! I think the main layout can be split into four sections, the main line through Masborough and Brightside stations, the old 'GC' route from Masborough to Nunnery Lane, the main line from Treeton/Chesterfield using the yard 'bypass' lines to Shepcote Lane Junctions & the 'GC' route and finally the yard area. Aside from the the fiddle yard, the yard area is likely to be the most expensive, in terms of trackwork, servos etc, so i think it makes sense to leave that till last. But both of your comments are noted, and thanks for the input so far. Couldnt agree more Mike

Afternoon all, Im slightly surprised that 186 people have so far looked at the thread (thanks guys (or girls!)) but no comments, so i'll assume that what i've proposed and laid out sounds ok, and nobody can see any problems... Im still learning SCARM but it seems quite good and easy - i've got the rough layout mapped out, although I am at 96 pieces of track, so will hit the 100 limit well before the full layout is mapped! Im thinking that actually once i've proven that everything fits that i may just crack on with the track-laying, so I'm not sure its worth me buying the full programme. Im only doing the one layout so would it get used again? I'll post the plan of what i have later today, it is very rough tho, and I am having some problems getting the track spacing correct, especially on curves. Can anyone tell me what the track spacing in sidings should be - along with double track and quadruple track? I assume Peco do not do a curved crossover at all in N gauge Code 55? I was trying to get a double crossover (Down Slow->Down Fast, and Up Slow->Up Fast) at the northern end of Masborough station but ideally it needs to be on a curve, but thats looking unlikely I think Im trying to keep all the curves in the scenic area to be four foot (48") radius or higher, most are coming out around 60" or 5-foot, so hopefully stock should glide round a smooth piece of track! But the principal of doing a rough plan has worked, 95% of the above sketch can be accommodated without it looking cramped - the only change is the loss of Carbook Sidings, which i've removed because i felt the inclusion would look pushed in. I had a feeling from the start that may be the case however - hence the provisional tag! The good thing is that the triangular connection to the west end of Tinsley Yard will fit in, I am a little concerned about the gradient being a bit sharp and on a curve, but some testing will likely need to be carried out there. I shall finish having a play about with the Yard design, and then hopefully push forward with the fiddle yards - because the main layout sits on top of the said yards, they will have to be laid, wired up and tested first, before any work can be done on the main layout. Ive sat and given much though to the fiddle yard, because of the previously stated reason, its not something that can be changed or added to later. Im thinking that each road needs to be around 6ft long to accommodate the longest trains, and with 18ft length to play with, current thinking is for two 10-12 road yards down each side, plus a couple of DMU sidings to represent the Barnsley branch, which heads off through a somewhat hidden junction between Brightside and Rotherham Masborough, will give around 50-52 fiddle roads, plus a handful of loco holding sidings. That should be amble to accommodate the variety of loco-hauled passenger (cross-country and Hull/Cleethorpes-Manchester workings), plus coal, intermodal, speedlink freights and trip workings, along with three or four HST sets and DMUs, in the fullness of time. Two of the yards will have the sidings arranged so that a loco arriving with loaded HAAs for example, can detach run over the pointwork into the next yard and connect onto a rake of empty HAAs, ready to return from the same end of the layout at a later point. Well I did say I wanted realism! Mike

Thanks for that - i'll go on the hunt and have a look at Walthers! Im thinking of building some out of foamboard and then putting a suitable covering over the top to resemble that steel cladding side that is quite popular. Really do like what you've done with the layout - hope your carrying on with it! Mike.

Hi Col, Which DCC system do you have? A friend of mine has had a number of discussions with Harold at Modratec about this, and I believe Harold modified his frame, there was an extra locking lever added i think - i'll have to ask to find out how. I know he uses Digitrax, and has CML TowerMaster cards connected to the emeck switches on the Modratec frame, so that when the frame throws and depresses the switch, it energies a momentary relay, that sends a single pulse to the TowerMaster card (the card in fact thinks that a push-to-make has been depressed) and the card then sends the DCC message out to control the points. All works very very well, but TowerMaster only work on Digitrax I think. However, you could combine the Modratec frame with the Megapoints system in that style if you wanted DCC. Failing that of course, the Modratec emeck switches could just be the switches direct to the megapoints control. Feel free to PM me if you want more info and i can always put you in touch. Mike

Hahaha! And the say the camera never lies ..... Cannot argue with that second view tho - must have been a trick of the light! The wiring on that board looks very neat! Do you have any methods for wiring up, or any schematic diagrams that you do to aid fault finding? Im just about to start work on my layout, so am keen to see what people are doing. Mike

Great looking layout .. hope somebody has called S&T for a wrong-side failure however .. signalled for the loop, but doing down the main! Im assuming the driver stopped and queried Mike

I've got a Megapoints controller board here just for demo purposes at the moment, as I havent started my new layout yet. Very impressed, very easy to use, and so far, very reliable. Added to which a couple of queries I had before buying it, Dave was very prompt and very detailed in his reply, so I would recommend his customer service back up, if you have any problems any time. Just one thing to remember, that depends on how you want to control them, but if your planning on using DCC, the Megapoints system needs a DCC connector add-on, which is extra cost. If your controlling them through switches its fine - if you are planning to have more than 12 points, then I *think* on the Megapoints system, there is a point (no pun intended!) where it becomes cheaper to go for a panel controller board. I dont want to tell you wrong however, so if your looking at more than 12 points (or the points are spaced out) I would encourage you to drop an email to Dave explaining what you want to do, how you want to control them, the number of points and asking him what would be the best and most cost-effective way of doing it with his system. At least then you can make an informed choice between the two? No connection other than as a customer, but would highly recommend those. I've no experience of the other one you mention. Mike

Thanks Brian, After posting that I managed to get the Masborough track layout sorted, and have played about with Shepcote Lane Junctions. I'll try and work out how to get the plan exported from SCARM over the next couple of days and post it on here. Mike

I had to do a double take on that video for a moment, very realistic - and realistic speeds for the trains too. Superb layout, well done. Mike

Hi, Congratulations on the new addition to the family! I've spent about half an hour this evening reading through this thread, its superb! Can i ask, I may have missed it earlier (sorry if i did) but how did you build the steelworks buildings - is it foamboard with some kind of covering? Mike

Hi, Sorry if i've missed this somewhere, but I cannot see anything on the website, i've had just returned to the N gauge hobby and am interested in purchasing a couple of these packs. Has the deadline for orders been announced yet? Cheers Mike

Hello all, I’ve been reading rmWeb as an interested party for about 12 months, but have just actually joined so as to be able to take part, rather than sitting on the touch line so to speak. I did have a Hornby OO gauge train set (cannot call it a model railway really! It was just track!) when I was younger, all started by my Dad. After drifting away from the modelling side, but still enjoy an active interest in the big railway, Im now the point where I shall hit the big 40 later this year, and decided that getting back into the hobby would be no bad thing! I’m amazed how how much the prices have altered since my last foray tho! I have acquired a couple of N gauge locomotives (Graham Farish Class 20 and 47) and a couple of 16-ton mineral wagons so far, second hand, which although both are DC I'm going to look at ‘chipping’ to DCC. I decided i didnt want to start buying too much stock until I had the layout plans sorted out, but equally wanted a couple to try and see what I thought to it. I have also been playing on a little test 3’x1’ test board with things like servos for point control and the like - it was all Peco solenoids in my day! Having got some experience of them now, I’ve decided its time to sort a proper layout out. After reading a lot of the layout threads on here, I reached a few conclusions for the ‘must haves’:- a) A mix of operational interest - so the ability to shunt wagons and watch trains pass by a location (although not a ‘roundy-roundy’, as seeing the same train go past two or three times ruins the illusion for me. b) A decent sized fiddle yard that would allow numerous trains to be held waiting to come onto the layout, which also gives the ability to run to a timetable, or at least an operating schedule. c) To be as realistic as possible for the South Yorkshire area in the mid 1980s, both in layout, train formations, operation etc. Including not necessarily full length trains, but decent length ones, to assist in creating the illusion, and the correct track spacing where possible, especially on main lines. d) Follow the ‘less is more’ principals, so the railway is in a setting, not the scenery is pushed in around it. e) Part containing a quadruple or double main line. For my interest, I like the main line railway, and a single track route just does not achieve what I want. f) After doodling for some weeks, I also realised that I would like to recreate an area of the railway, rather than a specific location, there by giving different views, and potentially different trains to be seen. All of that, I realised, created quite a tall order. The original list was about 10 entries, long but I took a serious look and paired down to what really was the ‘must haves’. Im fortunate in having a full floor-boarded and lit loft area that is some 18ft x 11ft in size, so I think that the above, especially in N gauge can be achieved. After playing with a number of scenarios and locations, I got close, but not what I would call perfect. So I took the two best ones, and ‘merged’ them, which involved changing the geography a little bit, but I think the realism remains. I have therefore selected the Tinsley/Rotherham area as the setting for the layout. There is, of course, some concessions, and I’ve had to reduce the length of the sidings representing Tinsley Yard, while also removing what would have been Tinsley TMD! Trackwork will be Peco Code 55, with points operated through micro-servos and the Megapoints system. The plan is to use long points throughout, and the widest radius curves possible. In reality the line from Rotherham Central station runs south to Shepcote Lane North Junction (the North Western entrance to the yard), while the route from Rotherham Masborough passes over the ‘Central’ line and heads to Treeton (the Eastern entrance to the yard) and onto Chesterfield. I’ve amended this to ignore the Central line and have the Masborough Line heading to Shepcote Lane, while the Eastern end of the yard, I’ve ‘tweaked’ to be four track but still heading south to Chesterfield, but perhaps with more industrialised surroundings than the reality of countryside around Treeton. The aim is that I can include both Rotherham Masborough and the Tinsley area in the layout, to achieve the above ‘six’ aims. The routes being on slightly different levels, separated by buildings and scenery. For the fiddle yard, I have created a plan for 30 odd sidings under the main layout, linked by a ‘low level loop’ that connects all layout entrance/exit points and all of the sidings, which will allow loaded steel trains to pass Masborough southbound, and empty ones northbound for example. The actual layout will be like a large figure ‘8’ design, with Tinsley Yard along the centre boards, which will be around 3ft wide - the outer boards all being 2ft wide. I do accept this is a long-term layout, both in terms of track laying, scenery and rolling stock acquisition - most of which (especially wagons) I expect will be gathered from swap meets or second-hand dealers. The idea is that the four track approach to Rotherham Masborough and the double-track route through Brightside will provide an opportunity for the models to ‘stretch-their-legs’ and give both loco-hauled intercity and inter-regional services, mixing with DMUs. The old ‘GC’ route through Shepcote Lane (and through Tinsley Yard) will be primarily freight, with the odd Cleethorpes-Sheffield-Manchester passenger working with a ’31’ being routed via Shepcote Junctions and Carbrook en route to Sheffield Midland. A slight ‘tweak’ to timetables should allow things like the Lackenby-Corby ‘tubeliner’ to be seen, routed via Shepcote Lane and the Yard bypass roads, before heading south, while steel, speedlink and coal traffic will predominate. I note that Dapol do an automatic style coupling, but a few people seem to have suggested that the Microtrains version is better? Does anyone have a view/experience? I appreciate its ambitious, and a large project for one-man, but I didn’t want to go down the road of a smaller layout, that id invested time and money in for it not to provide the level of enjoyment that I wanted. While its just me and my layout, I hope if I create Layout Topic for it once its off the ground and track is going down, that people may be interested in following its progress and ‘chipping in’ with ideas. Hope I’ve not waffled on too much … Im currently trying to plan it all out in the SCARM computer software, and will post a plan for comments shortly, but any thoughts/views on the layout or my proposals would be welcome. Mike