ianly

Even though the layout plan will only serve as a template, the tight curves on the top right corner really irritated me. So, I spent best part of an hour this morning tweaking and cajoling the flexitrack to the point that I now have curves with a radius of just over 3 feet. However, the larger radius curves mean that the heritage line as draw in yesterday's plan is no longer achievable, and has been removed for now. That being said, the majority of the line and small station remain as a branch, and also benefit from a larger radius curve. I also realised that while the westward platform loop is fine for a 2 or 3 car DMU it was slightly too short for a 2+4 HST. The only way I could squeeze in the pointwork to allow the platform to extend to the right was to use a double/single slip ? ( showing my lack of knowledge). Hopefully, the changes I made improve things rather than make them worse.

Again, all thanks for your ideas/suggestions. Holidays and recovering from surgical procedure have kept me away from this longer than I hoped. I worked up the suggestion by Zomboid which provided for some interesting and challenging possibilities. I even cleared out the garage roof-space in which I intend to construct the layout. So, some real progress has been made. However, after going back through the thread again I decided to follow up on 'The Johnster's' suggestion to look at the Reading - Newbury section of the GWR mainline. I also looked at how I could make better use of the space I have for the fiddle yard, and whether I could include a storage area below the main baseboard. My plans to date show the use of Peco Streamline curved points for the fiddle yard, but these use a lot of space. Therefore, my latest plan uses Peco SeTrack curve points, but only for the fiddle yard. Since the software I use to draw the plan doesn't make shaping Peco Flexi track particularly easy I used Peco Setrack 3 and 4 radius curves. This is for the plan only. When laying the track for real, the curve radius will be much larger in scenic areas. Getting back to 'The Johnster's' suggestion. Newbury station has 4 tracks and offers many of my original objectives, especially the mix of passenger and freight traffic. It therefore, makes for a useful template, albeit much longer than my space allows. So, modelling it isn't realistic. Nevertheless, I've tried to replicate the point work as best as possible to allow for the DMU that terminates at Newbury. Also, to minimise the amount of space used by the points. I've made use of two double slips. I'm not sure how wise this is. While I've kept the heritage line in it's also doubling up as the branch that goes to Newbury Racecourse in real world. I'm still undecided as to whether to keep or drop the dedicated heritage line. I've also shown the branch / heritage line looping back onto the mainline, but I'm not sure whether thats a wise move or not. I've still not shown any scenic content. That being said, I hope to include a river with bridge on either the right or left side of layout. I also intend to put a road over the track as east side of the main station as per the real Newbury. I'm still scratching my head as to how best to hide the west side of the main station. Another road bridge or elevated town section are possibilities, but any ideas would be welcome.

Thanks all, above info is really helpful Zoboid, Unfortunately, I didn't understand what you meant in your earlier post, hence not following up on it. However, now that it's been explained, especially the references to Google Maps and Tracksy I think I get the post being made. In first track plan "Princes Risborough" I've copied what I think are the relevant track arrangement directly from Google Maps. In the second track plan 'Princes Risborough (Flipped)' I've flipped it so that it's on the inside rather than outside of the layout. This shows the branch going into the bay platform and linking into the mainline. I've also left out the loops in the station bay, but these will be put back in later. I'm also assuming that the through line is up/down. Hopefully, I've interpreted all the info shared above correctly.

May be not such a bad idea as a static scene, except it would be a crane instead of a hand Good catch and is fairly easy to fix. I should add that the Cholsey <> Wallingford branch is pretty much as shown on the plan. I believe they have 3 Class 8's that are used to push/pull two Mk1 Chocolate and Cream coaches. Whichever of the Class 08's is in use simply loops from front to back, then vice versa at other end of line. At Walligford end there is an additional siding that seems to be used to store wagons and such like. Apparently, they've borrowed/hired a GWR 0-6-0 Pannier tank on a few occasions. Since there is no link to the mainline the Pannier Tank must have been lifted onto the track by crane. May be that's what Fraser was referring to. BTW, I see this as an adjunct rather than in place of the heritage elements I mentioned earlier. In a sense, I can have this branch running any time without impacting on main line activity. I would very much prefer not to be reversing trains along the mainline for the reasons you highlight. It's also one of the numerous failings of my original track plan. I'm conscious that mixing heritage stock with modern era needs to be implemented with care otherwise any semblance of realism will get lost, hence asking questions that for many here are fairly basic questions. Yes I noticed that, but it's not necessarily how I intend to portray the scenics. Yes, you mentioned that earlier, but I'm not clear on how big it would be and how it would work. If you could point me to an example or track plan I think the mist/smoke might clear. Also, where do I store a rake of four or five Mk1 coaches? Again, thanks for your input

I forget to include one of the options I've worked up for a possible 4 track solution. Obviously, it's no longer Cholsey, but this or something similar might well be a reasonable compromise.

It took a while, but I've decided that Cholsey is sufficiently close to my original brief that I'm going to go with it. Unfortunately, the limitation on the number of track elements available in free version of Anyrail prevented me from developing Fraser's plans any further. So, it was back to RailModeller Pro. In attached version I've worked up the main fiddle yard. I also decided that it was probably best to leave the heritage rail as is. Doing so will allow me to shunt a couple of carriages back and forth as actually happens in reality. I might even run a Class 153 DMU on this line occasionally. Leaving the heritage line as is also means that any larger steamers I might add later can be run on one of the main lines. I'm still unsure as to whether I should add the two fast lines Fraser mentioned. I think that doing so would add more interest, especially as the mix of freight (inc. liveries) and passenger traffic that runs on same is quite wide ranging. On the other hand, there's a good deal of freight and non stopping passenger traffic that goes straight through the active half of the station. While adding the two fast lines appears fairly simple I would need to expand the fiddle yard or reduce the number of lanes available for the two slow lines. Any thoughts/suggestions on which way to go would be of great help. Also, while researching the various approaches to how best to configure the fiddle yard I realised that since I plan to include sound on all or most of the locos then I may have an issue since they'll all will be on live track. Is this the issue some suggest and what methods are available to reduce/eliminate?

Thanks, Fraser, files received.

Thanks, Fraser, and apologies for not responding to your post earlier. I spent few hours on Google Maps and Youtube today checking out Cholsey (I'd looked at Didcot Parkway a few weeks back). As you say, it certainly aligns pretty close with my original thinking. I watched at least 10 Youtube videos on the station that date from around 2014 though to early June of this year. Interestingly, there appears to be quite a lot of passenger and freight traffic that travels through the station. There also appears to be a good mix of liveries on freight traffic. Therefore, even with just the two slow lines it looks like I could easily achieve something interesting, although I'm think that including the two fast lines would be even better. The heritage railway stopping as it does at Cholsey station reduces the need for the separate station that I'd been planning for. However, as Sam mentioned, I'll need to figure out how to get the persevered locos onto the correct slow main line. I suspect that's best done somewhere off-scene, although not quite sure where is best. If you could share the 'Anyrail' file with me that would be great. I have the limited copy on my Windows PC but haven't spent any time trying to learn how to use. Again, thanks for your input.

Thanks, Phil. I hadn't even thought along the lines you've shown. found the concept is really interesting that I'd started to convert your sketch to a layout plan to see how it looked. Unfortunately, I'll need to park everything for a week or so.

Thanks, Chimer, it's certainly something I have thought about, especially having looked at the plans Phil drafted for TallPaul69 in his 'Design Idea Welcome' thread. An alternative might be to keep the heritage line all at the higher level. If you can share any other examples or tracks plans that you think might work with the space I have then I'll certainly check them out.

Not to worry, I asked for advice, and what you've all given to date has been very helpful and appreciated. Unfortunately, creative thinking has never been one of my stronger attributes Having facing points doesn't really concern me, but your comment regarding their location is one that I certainly don't wish to ignore. Therefore, in below plan I've moved them into the fiddle yard (shown in blue) and linked them to the two through lanes. Hopefully, this is a more appropriate location. I've also highlighted (yellow) what I think you meant by unnecessary wiggles. I'll keep them for now, but expect they'll eventually disappear or be tweaked. The heritage station has been temporarily removed from below plan, although I did look at how I could integrate into the the main station area as you describe. Sadly, I'm struggling to see a way to do so that doesn't involve moving the main station which then puts it a touch too close to the lift up section. I need to include same due to location of the floor hatch from garage below. That being said, I do like the idea of the heritage station and main station being in the same general area as the main station. I suspect the work around may mean that I need to rotate the layout through 180 degrees. BTW, the heritage platform was shown 1.25 metres, which I thought would be enough for a steam loco and four coaches. The reason for showing the fiddle yard behind a scenic break was more to do with how I eventually intend to operate the layout rather than just aesthetics. My intention has always been to keep the track arrangement as simple as possible, but not so simple that I end up with the same pair of trains going round and round or that it doesn't have some sense of realism. By introducing the fiddle yard as suggested in the earlier posts I should be able to sequence more trains to run at the same time. For example, as one train goes of scene in the fiddle yard and stops another will be leaving. Again, thanks all for your help to date and any further guidance you can give.

Thanks, for moving the thread, much appreciated.

I think you're right, but short of a moderator moving this thread or me starting a new new one on the sub forum you mention I'm stuck here. I'm a moderator on a couple of large forums and can easily move threads. Unfortunately, I can't even see where to ask a moderator for assistance on these forums.

I've updated the layout plan a bit since my last post. The lanes in fiddle yard are slightly longer and located behind a removable scenic break. This allowed me to slot in the heritage station I mentioned previously. My idea here is to allow a steamer to circulate part of the inner loop of the main track rather than having run through the fiddle yard or reverse back into the heritage station. Please, feel free to say if what I've shown can be improved upon BTW, please say if I've posted to the wrong forum

As suggested, I've smoothed out the curves and even managed to put the main station on a diagonal. The fiddle yard is largely based on the plans Phil did for Paul. The crossovers between the two main lines at each end of the fiddle yard are now included, but may well not be in best location. I still need to position a small heritage station somewhere, and probably some sidings, head shunt at the main station area. The track spacing is still a bit wide in places, but hopefully this can be fine-tuned later.

Thanks for your thoughts, Phil. I've already factored above in, although not shown in above plan as I'm not sure on best location. Identifying where track will go on and off scene is exercising me a bit at present. In my original plan I showed the entire storage area off-scene, but feedback indicated that wasn't ideal. It may be I'm confusing FY and storage. BTW, the way I've drawn access/egress from the fiddle yard in Railmodeller Pro is very crude and needs a good deal of tidying work. Agreed. At present, and to keep things simple, they're drawn using 2nd and 3rd radius Setrack. However, they'll will eventually be Flexitrack with much gentler curves. Putting the station much closer to the right hand corner and on a diagonal/curve is something I've sketched on paper, but not found easy to draw in the software I'm using Ian

I'm keen to automate where it adds interest. As such, the layout wiring will facilitate block detection, etc from from the outset. While I have the space/height to place the fiddle yard at a lower level I would prefer to avoid the issues that it introduces. That being said, the ability to increase the track length through a looped 8 is something I would consider if space allowed. Actually, I had looked at one of CJ Freezers garden shed plans that did just that, but felt that while conceptually interesting, the space he indicated as being required didn't appear realistic (i.e. artists licence).

Again, thanks for all the feedback and suggestions, it’s much appreciated. I think below plan, which I acknowledge still requires a good deal more work, addresses the main issue identified with my first plan. I've reduced to two lines rather than the original four, although the station will expand to four. I'll probably place the station/platforms closer to the bottom right corner than currently shown. My longest train is likely to be in the order of 1.7m, although the fiddle yard with 6 lanes (2 through) is drawn at 1.8m in length. I don't expect that all of the lanes need to be 1.8m long, but as others have mentioned, more trains allows for greater variety in running sessions. A couple more lanes in each direction would be useful, but they’d need to be shorter than those already included. I had mentioned modern image in my first post, but probably should have been more specific. As such, I expect to be modelling 2015-16 although some steamers/ old DMUs will make an occasional appearance. As mentioned above, the plan is far from complete. For example, I still need to position a small heritage station, and probably some sidings, head shunt at the main station area. I also need to include a crossover between the two main lines, although I haven’t decided where yet.

Paul, I came across the thread you mention a week or so back. Unfortunately, having found it and read through from beginning to end i forgot to bookmark the page link. Having just looked at it again, I see there is info and sketches that I don't recall seeing before. More reading. I found Phil's designs to be very informative, especially the way in which he used the incline. The absence of a station did confuse me somewhat, but your explanation above helps me better understand why. Thanks again, Ian

Thank you all for your excellent feedback. I think I have a fair bit of reading to do.

First post and first attempt at a layout in 30 plus years. So, looking for any help I can get. My plan is to construct a modern image 00 gauge layout. The layout will be located in the roof-space above my garage. The room already exists and has dimensions 3.65m long by 3m wide (in old money 12ft by 9ft 10in). It is fully insulated, connected to house central heating and well lit. Access from the garage below is via concertina steps, which don’t project into the room itself. I’ve attached a draft (very) plan that shows the room and position of the floor hatch. The baseboard will be around the room. The layout will be DCC, and I hope to motorise all points/crossovers. I’m looking to model an imaginary location on the GWR mainline from Reading westwards. As such, I’ve shown four tracks and station platforms. I expect to run a mix of passenger (inc. 2+4 HST and DMUs) and freight. I also hope to occasionally run a couple of heritage steamers, although unclear as to the best location for storage sheds and/or a small country type station. My preference is to keep the layout as simple but visually interesting as possible, thus allowing me to just watch the trains go by. I’m not overly interested in a fiddle yard with acres of track with complex point arrangements, shunting, etc. Ideally, loco and rolling stock not in use will be stored off scene. The plan shows a single way in/out of a four-lane storage area but I’m open to the idea of more storage lanes and one or both outer fast lines going through this area, albeit behind a scenic break. Unfortunately, my skills with the software RailModeller Pro) used to draw the plan are somewhat limited which means I’ve not found a way to fit a through-line storage area into the available space. May be the space I have simply won’t allow this. I've not shown points/crossovers as I’m also unclear where best to put same on order that trains can from the outer loop to the inner loop and vice versa. This aspect in particular is the one that I need the most help with. As drawn, the plan shows Peco Code 100 Setrack Curves (r2, 3 and 4) and Code 100 Streamline Flextrack. The setract curves were used as it made it easier for me to draw than indicate same as a preference. Any comments/help that can be passed my way would be much appreciated. Ian