Robert Stokes

I think this is being too pessimistic. It depends on the coaches you use. I have a minimum radius of 24" with 48mm track centres so the radii of double tracks are 610 and 658mm. Trains of 57' coaches will pass one another without touching. Of course, in 00 gauge 48mm is still larger than the prototype, which I think should scale to 44mm, but it is better than Peco's nominal 50mm, which if you fit two points as a crossover with insulated joiners is more like 51 or even 52mm. Robert

Once you have tried DCC and seen its advantages, I don't think that you will want to go back to analogue. No more wondering why the engine won't move and then realising that you haven't flicked the switch to put power into an isolated section. Then there is the beauty of an engine sounding like it should as well as looking and moving like it should. That's not to mention the ease of double-heading or banking a train with another engine. I can understand people with large layouts and dozens of engines being reluctant to change but certainly anyone starting today would be advised to adopt DCC from the beginning. Not doing so would be like refusing to get a washing machine and hand washing all your clothes. An extremely tight budget is the only possible reason in either case. Robert

Perhaps two categories of award - one for layouts over a certain size, and one for those under that size. Of course the dividing line would have to be related to the scale being modelled - say, 8 square feet for 00, 2 square feet for N and 20 square feet for O gauge. Robert.

If I have understood the OP, he is not asking how to remove the ballast, but what to use as a replacement. Did you originally use real granite ballast or something similar? If so then you could try replacing it with crushed cork pieces painted the appropriate colour. Try doing this to a yard or two to see whether it makes a real difference before attacking the rest. Robert

Jim has just made the points I was going to make. I recommend ID backscenes which are photographic and very good. Their standard range for 00 scale is 15" high but they can do then higher for special order. When I built my first layout in a shed which was much lower than the one I am doing now, they made me a set of backscenes 27" high. I think that for 00 gauge you will find 12" too low and should go for a minimum of 15". Robert

DCC is sometimes advertised as "two wires only" but that is misleading. Best practice is to have two thick wires running around the layout, which are called "bus wires" (I don't know why). Droppers are thinner wires connecting the track to the bus wires at several places. Some people argue that you should have droppers from every piece of track to the bus wires, while others argue that you don't. Insulfrog points may make things easier but you may find that some engines stall on them. Why do you need to build a test track first? Just start the one you really want and learn as you go. Robert

I reckon that for 00 gauge a 'fence' 40mm above baseboard top would stop anything falling over the edge because that is more than half the height of the rolling stock. Robert

I think that you should have done the insulation work before starting to build the layout. You are going to find it very difficult to do it with those boards in place. In fact it would probably be easier to dismantle them, do the insulation, and then re-assemble them. Also most people work out their plan first and then build boards to accommodate it. Robert

Is there any reason why you can't have a long board down the opposite side to the present one, so that you can have an ordinary roundy-roundy layout? Think about having storage loops behind or underneath scenery so that trains seem to arrive from somewhere and then go somewhere. I always think that if you can see all of the trains all of the time, it doesn't look very realistic (assuming that you want to achieve a fair degree of realism). Robert

You might find that dismantling it has jeopardised getting it changed under warranty. I hope not. Certainly don't tell the shop that you have done anything to it and put it back together very carefully. Robert

Another way to remove the pins is to put a small screwdriver under the end of a sleeper which has a pin and gently twist the screwdriver so that it slightly lifts it. If you then push the sleeper down again it may leave the pin head showing. You can then pull it out with pliers while holding down the sleeper. I have done this quite successfully to remove yards of track. You lose the odd one because the rail comes out of the chairs but it should work most of the time. I should mention that I used this process on track which I had pinned down myself with pins at each end of a sleeper. It may not work so well with track pinned down with one pin in the middle of a sleeper. Robert

This is rather surprising, as I would have assumed that the graphite would make the track slippery. Robert

I don't work in N-gauge, but I suspect the second one with the bridge taking one track over another will require quite severe gradients. Perhaps an experienced N-gauge modeller will be along soon to confirm or deny that. Good luck with the project whichever one you choose. Robert Edit. I've just realised that the first one has the same feature. I would check the gradients carefully.

Why was the formula not shortened by cancelling the 0.8 on the top with the 2 below to get T.E. = 0.4*p*(D^2)*S*z/d Note that I am using D^2 for D squared as I don't know how to do superscript. Robert

Thank you for the help. I will get some of the Wickes stuff when I'm next in the nearest town with one of their stores Robert.

I am building the very slightly curved platforms for my layout.. They are made from carboard tops on stripwood underneath. I want to stick Wills plastic stone facing to the smooth wood front and back. I have tried double-sided sticky tape but this has not proved too successful. Could you please advise what adhesive would be much better. By the way, I don't want to use superglue. Thank you, Robert

The gap down the middle of my shed between the two sides of the layout is 68cm (a fraction under 27") and I have never had any trouble with it. I can get past visitors back to back with no bother. I can accept that 24" may be a little too narrow, but 27" should present no problem. Bear in mind that doorways are made wide enough for wheelchairs, prams and pushchairs, and not least for carrying through large furniture items. Robert

You could use a 4-way rotary switch to control access to each of the loops. The rotary switch would operate the two point motors on the 3-way point and the one at the right-hand end of the DS. You then use the SPDT switch to control the left-hand point motor on the DS to allow an engine to run from the short siding into either of the top two loops. Robert

The way to use hinges and have negligible gap between the track ends, is to mount the hinges (two small types with one each side of the tracks) so that the middle of the hinge axis is just above the top of the rails. If you draw a side view diagram of the situation you should see how the system works to stop the track ends clashing. I hope this helps. If the tight curve is at the opening end then take a larger radius curve onto the lifting flap but make the end at an angle as I mentioned earlier. This also means that you can make the gap a little wider for easier access. Robert

Yes, I realise that. I wasn't advocating it for the OP, just explaining why I had abandoned a lifting flap. Robert

I'm guessing that, unless the shed is really large, the tracks will have to curve as they cross the bridge. It is best if the ends of the lifting flap are cut at right angles to the tracks or as near to this as possible, especially at the opening end. There is no reason why the lifting flap has to be rectangular. I think you will find that, if the tracks are cut at a sharp angle, then derailments will be more common. Another thing to keep in mind is how wide the lifting flap has to be. It need not be the whole width of the doorway. You will probably find that a gap of about 60cm is enough to get through easily. The shorter the lifting flap the easier it will be to get it to work properly. Of course this won't be an easy option if it is already made. It is precisely because of the difficulties with a lifting flap, that I have raised the height of my layout in a shed, to the point where I can duck under a fixed fitting of tracks across the doorway. Robert

That's a really good sized space and you've made a great start. May I suggest two things before you go much further. First, you could use cardboard sheets to make a curved backscene in each corner which I think improves the situation. Secondly, I recommend I.D. Backscenes - they are photographic ones of several different types and look really good. You can see them on my layout thread, but they are temporarily on the ceiling while I change the layout. My next post on that thread will probably show them moved into position. Robert

AFAIK junction signals are only used as you approach a facing point, not for a trailing point like this one. I suggest that it would be a home signal or ground signal depending on where the next home signal is located. As I understand it a train must not be able to enter the next block section by only passing a ground signal. Robert

Personally I think that anything advertised as 12V, 3A will be fine for a model railway. All advertised standards have a safety margin built in. I would very surprised if these plugs could not handle 16V, 4A without a problem, especially if it were for a short time. You have you have a lot happening on your model railway for it to need 3A anyway. My NCE Power Cab controller is rated at 2A but it can run four trains with no problem. Robert Robert

Welcome. Can we see some pictures of the rest of the layout? Robert