Cliff M

Great thanks all. So I think I am going to use Kadee for the loco and the 'end' pieces of rolling stock but I like the magnetic couplers from Hunt Couplings aka West Hill Wagon Works for all the 'permanently attached stock' as they just seem less fiddly to use. Have you any experience of these? What size for a Bachman Class 37 00 gauge or a Hornby Class 08? Many thanks

I meant to add. Can you give me your experiences with uncoupling please.? Is it better with magnets under the track, ramps, powered systems, solenoids, etc.? Or is there no real practical solution? Am I right in thinking I need to change the NEM couplers for Kadee? What would you use and recommend? Many thanks

Thanks all. Very helpful and detailed. So I think I will place a pre-order for the Hornby 08 with sound fitted at £237.99 from Kernow. Do I need a stay-alive fitted as well with the Hornby? Can I do that part myself? My layout has no radius 1 curves at all.

Hi all. I am very new to model railways and I am building my first layout after a lot of input from this forum. Thank you all. I have been trying to buy a Class 08 shunter and have found that Bachman only has the purple/blue, black, or bright orange liveried ones available. I wanted the BR green livery so in the absence of Bachman I have been looking at the Hornby Class 08, 0-6-0, D3069 - Era 5. and the Heljan Class 07 both from Kernow Model Rail. Does anyone have any experience or comments on either of these? I am using DCC and would prefer sound-fitted. I am particularly interested in how they run mechanically, and the build quality rather than their scale detailing, etc. 2937 Heljan Class 07 Diesel number D2998 BR Green wasp stripes (kernowmodelrailcentre.com) R30301TXS Hornby BR, Class 08, 0-6-0, D3069 - Era 5 (kernowmodelrailcentre.com) Many thanks

That's great Ian. Very helpful. I'll put some thought into where the frame wood lands and as you say try to design it around the track ditto the point motors. As I am using MP 1s etc some may have to be on the surface and then disguised. I will include the red suggested point as I can see this adds to the interest and involvement. I really appreciated all your input.

Great thanks, Ian. Very sound advice. Also thanks for pointing out the left side curves being too close and the tip to put the board on its end when wiring after laying the track. I am glad that the smaller platform will be ok. I would be very interested if you could just detail and describe what you mean by this idea of retaining one run round loop maybe by naming point numbers etc to give me where it would run or what existing track could be extended. Perhaps send a drawing? I do get your point about the number of pieces of set track. I will have a good look and try to reduce them. BTW I am using wooden flexi, should it be better to use concrete? Yes, the access well I am still thinking about it. I am concerned about cutting through the framework underneath making things less rigid to produce a larger workable hole. Do I just reconnect the cut frame edges to the nearest support around the outside of the well? If I made it scenic, do I just stick grass or whatever directly to the 9mm ply top surface, or do I need to cover the ply with something first? So see if I've got this right. I will loosely lay the track, after it's all connected I will introduce 3 mm cork underneath and then fix it to the board and make all necessary droppers and holes and holes for the point motors. Do you recommend soft soldering the droppers to the track or have you ever used the Peco dropper track joiners that do not need soldering? I can then put the board on its edge and wire everything up. I can then apply power and test and troubleshoot. What do you think?

So how about this? The distance from the outer track center to center, to the middle track at that left-hand middle pinch point starting at point no. 6 is now 70mm. from the middle to the third track it's now 78 mm and from there to the inner fourth it's now 72 mm. I've lost a little height from the smaller platform which is now 68mm in a space between the tracks of 100mm. Would this smaller platform look ok scale-wise at 68mm or does it need to be wider? I have also changed the loco sheds and renumbered the points.

ok, I'll rework the left side and re-post. Thanks

Yes, that pinch point looks narrow but is 2.2 in I have now reworked the curves slightly to give 2.3 in. The outer track to the second track gap is 2.4 in. at that same point. I will think about what to do with the sheds etc, I think I'll have just one line in the top left and two in the shunter area though. Your thoughts on retailers? Also is it necessary to have a dropper on every piece of track or is it every so often, measured out, on a layout like this?

Just to add for The johnster, the inner shed I thought could be for the shunter only, I might well reduce it to one track or have two sheds, one for the shunter and one as a cleaning wash shed. I will be operating the layout primarily on my own so that's another reason I am going for the Digitrax DCS 52 controller as I think I will be seated most of the time. Do you use certain retailers?

Thanks, Dungrange, I take your point about the distance between those points and I thank you for pointing that out. I have missed this at some stage so I have now inserted an ST-203 at 1.6 in to widen the curves in the lower left quadrant. I cannot have any greater size than these as they push the layout further up the board and it then takes footprint size away from the station. This also meant changing point 10 to a curved one and moving it further up the board. The minimum distance now at the narrowest part of any of the curves is 2.2 in. The operating voids were just to place them on the board so other posters knew I was going to include them. I have made an attempt to make them more realistic but I will shape them after the track is laid as I need to cross some of the main support battens and finally cut them then. Thanks, Torper for your encouragement. Yes, I really wanted a layout with lots of shunting opportunities and plenty to do. I will have all manual switches for the points and it means I can have 3 trains running altogether, say a class 37 plus 2/3 carriages on the outer track and maybe just a two loco DMU on the middle track while I can have say a class 08 shunter doing movements in the inner shunting/industry area. So maybe I've finally got there with this layout thanks to all of you. I would appreciate it if any of you could recommend an online retailer where I can buy the track. I don't have any shops near me so it has to be mail order. Not necessarily the cheapest but someone you guys trust and have had good dealings with over time. Likewise all the point motors and wiring etc. I am going to use MP 1s and MP 4s Many thanks all.

So how about this, I have removed the crossing, repositioned point 2 next to point 1, and added points 2A and 3A. Now we have the outer track conveniently connected to track 2 and the inner shunting area. I think as you all say, this solves the remaining problems but do comment if you know better. I have put two loco sidings in the top left corner. Is this near what you had in mind The Johnster? I am building the baseboard now. As always many thanks.

Or maybe like this? You can tell me what to do as much as you like as you have the experience and up until 5 weeks ago I knew nothing about model railways !!

Ok Johnster, I do get your point. I'm not sure exactly what you mean but is it something like my screenshot? Just did it roughly. BTW I have so many sidings as I think my rolling stock etc will be kept on the layout as I have no other room. I will pack up the locos though.

Ok again thanks all. Here is what I think could be the final working plan. I have simplified the layout by removing the second crossover and the original point no. 1. I have also removed points 9,10 altogether and replaced 5 with an SLU-77 a bit further up the line. I have moved the station points 7 and 8 to the outer loop which gives me far more depth for station buildings, The edge of the board to the edge of the track for the station platform is now 198 mm and the smaller platform will have no buildings just a walkway bridge and will serve both sides, is 110mm. I have removed points 20,21 and reworked the sidings there. I have also reworked the sidings at the bottom right. Overall this reduces the number of points by 5 and the trains can access all tracks but if a train goes clockwise from the outer track to the second track, using points 4 and 5, then to get back onto the outer track it will have to reverse through 5 and 4 to do it, wrong way. I can live with that. Also if a train goes anticlockwise on track 2, to get onto the outer loop it will be going the wrong way through 5 and 4 again. I think I'm ok with this as it is a much simpler plan and gets back to the original 8-foot width which makes building the baseboard easier, but importantly gives the layout plenty of depth for the station. Please continue with the comments. Thanks

Thanks, Robin I appreciate how much time you have put into this. I was trying to drive on the left so the outer circuit is clockwise and the inner anticlockwise. The above comment was posted in earlier layout versions so to stop trains travelling in the wrong direction I ended up with the two crossovers. I am now realising that this isn't always possible with model layouts. Is this correct? If so I could now use just one crossover and remove points 2 and 12 as the new side points 5,6,9,10 enable the same thing to happen ie the outer track can access the inner track (still going clockwise) and then through point 4 access the shunter sections. This would get me back to 8 ft width rather than 8ft 4 in. If you are confirming that the shunter always pushes stock into sidings then I can also remove points 20, and 21 and just have straight dead ends. Could you clarify your idea here, please? (I've also offered an alternative by having the second loop working more as a branch line with terminal features; I left the loop sidings in place although I would probably put a headshunt in that one as well. Maybe that line should have a run-around in the station but I haven't put that in.) I've posted my layout again for your reference.

I have found another 4 in on the width so everything now fits. The station area is 150 mm from the edge of the board to the edge of the track. The Peco Wills station country building for example is 121 mm in width plus then a platform of around 28 mm less a few mm set back from the edge of the track. I could even cut out the back wall of the station as it's going to be up against the wall of the garage permanently so it will all fit better if needed. Do you have any further thoughts? How about you Harlequin, Dungrange, ITG, and anyone else before I go out and buy the timber for the board? I would appreciate your final comments as you have all been so helpful. Thanks in advance. Cliff

I take your point, Robin so I have put in the spacers ( I can only fit 41mm) between points 3 and 2, and as you can see it pushes the layout outside the board by 1.5 in. I will remeasure the width I can use as I should be able to find another 3 in. It will make things very tight but that's preferable to having too tight a curve. I am not sure what I can do with the station platforms as I have already increased the height of the board by 3 in. After measuring they are 5 in and 3 in which I thought is ok according to Dungrange in an earlier post.

The edge of the board at the sides is 1.5 in but I can increase the board by 1 to 2 in if needed width ways.

Just to add, the distance between tracks at the center of all outer curves is now 2.25 in.

Thanks again all. DCB, if I remove point no. 1 as you suggest then the middle track has no access to the inner shunting system for a train going anticlockwise ie driving on the left. Also loops 1 and 2 are just to recover the shunter as I envisage the straights to be just where rolling stock wagons will be deposited. I think I have now solved the spacing problem by adding a small straight ST 203 between points 5,6 and 9,10. this gives the extra width needed on all turns as you have pointed out. The new center-to-center smallest measurement at the start of the turns is now 2.35 in. Please let me know if I'm wrong or if I need even more space. I have also discovered the fairly new point SLU-76 and 77 which are Unifrog so I can connect them as an Electrofrog. They give a tighter radius of 33.75 degrees and so I have placed them at either end of the new longer station. I also have extended the board by another 2 in which gives me a distance of 5.5 in from the top edge of the board to the edge of the outer track. Have I placed the station platforms in the correct spaces? Do you think this station would now work with buildings etc with the space it now has?

Thanks, DCB, if you could take a look at my latest layout just above your post and let me have your comments, please?+ I cannot seem to make the curved point work and I have posted some tries with it above too.

Thanks all. I've just been able to upload my latest design. As Torper says it's not very prototypical but I just wanted a layout with plenty of interest and things to do and have some fun with it, thanks Torper. Harlequin I've included 3 tries at using the SLE-87 both on the outer and the inner tracks but as you can see I run out of room to make a sharp enough turn as the radius is only 19 degrees. Am I missing something here? Dungrange if you now look at the latest layout I think I have addressed all the curve issues you have correctly raised as I have centered them all on the outside track and the middle track as the spacing is now dictated by the new points numbers 5,6,9,10. these points connect the outside track to the middle track which was the only thing missing as pointed out by ITG. Any final comments are most welcome. Is the inability to upload with error 200 something that happens regularly?

Many thanks, Harlequin that's exactly the type of input I need. Could you tell me the Peco model number of the track shown 'Going one step further and using a Streamline curved left-hand turnout (right, green) gains a little bit more platform length'. Do you think I now have enough distance between the station rails as I have extended the board to 5 ft 6 in? (by 6 in) I have now made some more improvements by adding point 23 so I was then able to make the shunter rails longer. The SLE-86 and SLE-87 are the only curved electrofrog points listed in Scarm for Peco 100 shown top right and listed on the left. I am unable to upload a screenshot as I get the following error message. Do you know what might be happening? Sorry, an unknown server error occurred when uploading this file. (Error code: -200)

Thanks, ITG, I have now included 4 more points to connect the outer line to the middle line at the sides. I have not used any Radius 1 curves. If I move the station loop curves as you say I just get an unworkable angle. The inner radius curves are R 2. Comments on the station now as I have reworked the whole of the outer and middle curves to center everything and get a bit more room for the station. Am I correct in thinking it only needs two platforms? Dungrange, taking in your comments, which are very detailed and very helpful, what do you think of the station now? The distance from the top edge of the board and the top edge of the top track is 4.5 ins. so any building could be 3.75 in footprint, is this ok? The curved point change is a problem I have tried before but the only electro-frog curved point is the SLE-87 which is shown top right. It is too long and too light a curve to be useful.