Jaggzuk

The inclines were a necessity, as I was told the new layout had to have bridges for cars and trains to go under! As for locos and era, well if it were just my layout I was building, then it would be BR Blue 1970 onwards with a strong leaning towards Speedlink and a hint of Network SouthEast all under semaphore signalling, deep sigh. It was the time I remember so well from my formative railway years. And this would be my layout when it gets built; North Marsh Road - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/gallery/album_2706/gallery_4412_2706_328042.jpg & http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/469-north-marsh-road-eastern-region-br-blue-oo/ However, apart from my collection of BR Blue, we have an eclectic mix of other rolling stock, from SR steam to to modem Class 66 and ranging age from old (gifts my Dads collection) to current top spec Bachmann and Hornby. I buy both new and second-hand plus we have a couple of re-sprays on the go, NWR Yellow coaches to go with the Hornby Railroad yellow sound Class 37. The aim will be to convert all locos to run under DCC power, but in reality I think some will remain DC and so the the layout will have to be dual power control. This will allow guest non DCC locos to visit us. So what ere? Well I think it will be 1970 to 2016, with steam specials thrown in. At the end of the day the boys want to play/run with what they see for real.

I think I’ve over done it with the whiskey! Time to open the next bottle, Jura Elixir…. Quite excited if not slightly apprehensive at the amount of card I now have to stick together! So this amounts to all the kits needed to create all the embankments, cuttings and bridge substructures; having already done the four tunnel portals and used up one stone retaining wall kit so far. These are curtesy of www.track-shack.com a company I have only just found and they are really good. Great price, the cheapest I could find on the web and very fast postal turnaround. We have had a go at some trial track weathering and ballasting samples. Ballasting and track weathering to me is one of the most significant aspects to get right, as it form such a visual part of the finished railway, that if you get it wrong it is like a really bad splinter. So I knocked up a couple of bits of underplayed track and then got some help with the gluing task and was really surprised at how good his hand/finger skill was slowly squeezing one drop of glue at a time out of the syringe and not missing a single piece of ballast!! In fact he told me to let him do it all… Mmmm, just wonder how much free labour I will get on the main ballast work before some form of bribe comes in to play Not too convinced by the colour of the ballast I have used; Woodland Scenics Medium Brown and Guagemaster Granite ballast. To me it is too uniform in colour, so I think I will have to create a home blend of colours. More trials required I think, any advice on mixing ballast (makes / colour) to get a better real life look? The other big effort has been in creating the country end landscape using real stone in the form of rock outcrops, cutting and embankment. I used thin layers of stone from old laminated sandstone roofing slate that I had left over from our house re-roof. Slightly surprised myself how satisfying this was fitting it all together. I used fairly liquid plaster to stick it all together and to create the soil overlay. I hope once all the grass, bushed etc. are added it should look the part. General view of the country end Cutting down to the tunnel Embankment up to the flyover with some temp play track in place Thanks for all the positive and supportive comments so far, much appreciated, I hope I keep you up to date with regular posts, but the dreaded back to work after the holiday day is looming on Monday.

So here is the final track plan, which has now gone in to the build phase, follow here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106602-family-8x4-oo-layout-%E2%80%93-the-christmas-engineering-blockade/ I have now added to the plan the scope for a future fiddle yard. Both the FY spurs will come out from under the two tunnels and these will be built in ready for the FY addition at a later date. The fiddle yard will allow the scope of running to be considerably increased as the boys grow up. Plus we can keep all of our stock on the layout between operating session rather than re-boxing every time. Anyway on with the build....

Well, waiting for New Year so, no better time that to start a new topic. Having pretty much completed the planning for a new 8x4 layout for my 2 young boys (5 and 2 1/2) and myself , see here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/104302-a-new-family-8x4-layout/, I decided to go for a big Christmas build project, or more aptly an Engineering Blockade! First of all here is the final plan. My aim is to keep this topic up to date with the layout build process and hope it will be both informative and enjoyable to read. Apart from the obvious, building a layout for my boys (and me), I want to use the build time to try out lots of different methods, techniques and materials. So I will drop these trials in to the topic as and when I try something out. So this first post will be a bit of an update on the progress so far achieved. The old layout was completely striped back to just the baseboard and the new build was started on Dec 16th. I started with the 1:1 plan printed from SCARM placed on the baseboard and I cut little slots at 3” spacing across all the tracks and then marked the position of the rails on to the baseboard. Next I cut out a secondary baseboard for the station and goods yard area and this was to be fixed at +40mm level from the main board. Before fixing it in place I cut 60mm dia round holes in the main board so that all the point motors could be fixed to the upper board. There is nothing flash about the station board, just 9mm MDF on various softwood spaces. The next big part was to create all the gradients. I decided to use Woodland Scenic Risers and Inclines with a 2% gradient. I was a bit hesitant to use such a product purely on the cost, but I have to say they have made life so easy and I had all the gradient track lines done in two evenings! Retrospectively, well worth the cost outlay. To fix in place, I simply used PVA glue to stick the various layers together and to hold everything in place I used bamboo skewers through the layers and a few heavy weights. Next task was to create the land forms. I used medium density polystyrene, which is very firm and does not crush very easily. You have to be carefully what you use to stick polystyrene, PVA take a very long time to dry as it cannot breath through the styrene, silicone sealant is OK, but some will melt the styrene. I use Pinkgrip to fix the styrene boards to the MDF baseboard and then silicone or Pinkgrip when layering up. Again I used a few bamboo skewers through the layers. I did do some adhesive trials and found that after 24 hours drying time the PVA was still wet and had little adhesion bond. The silicone sealant was OK, it had set but was a bit weak when it came to pull apart test. Pinkgrip was good and strong, but there was a bit of melting to the styrene, but not enough to cause a failure on adhesion. At the end of the day the polystyrene is only being used as a former to be coated with a plaster finish, so a very strong bond is not too important. Once set, the polystyrene was carved to shape. I tried a homemade hot wire cutter but this overheated my 12v transformer and just took too long to cut with, so it was back to a kitchen knife (oops). Overall I am really pleased with how quick the landscape came together and the look was what I had planned on SCARM. The next product I have never used before was plaster impregnated mesh. I bought a pack for 4 rolls and these have done most of the land form. I found this very easy to use on top of the polystyrene. This was one task that my eldest enjoyed helping out with, in fact he has done most of it; a bit of messy fun time. The instructions recommend three layers, but as said before the polystyrene does not crush, so I have only had to use 2 layers of plaster mesh to create a very hard shell. As I have now run out of the bought rolls, I plan to experiment with powder plaster and various cotton based medium such as cheep dish cloths or old bed sheets – results to be posted later. Most nights, post Christmas day and once the boys have gone to bed, have been spent half watching TV while making all the landscape structures for the layout; tunnel portals, retaining walls and bridges. At them moment they are all Metcalfe kits and they are great as they just do the job. I intend to tryout other products and in particular Scalescene (or similar PDF print kits) as they provide some really nice looking buildings. The kit building process has been helped with a rather nice bottle of Jura malt. Anyway that brings things pretty much up to date. The next tasks on the list are: creation of the two tunnels, fixing in place all the retaining walls, attempting some form of rock cutting, building to truss bridge substructure and gluing done all the track beds. Enough chat for now, so here are the progress photos. The bare baseboard starting point, 8x4 foot, plus 1 inch all round. Marking out the track position Inclines fixed and point motor holes cut out. Upper station board, gradients, land forms all fixed in place. Country end, cutting and embankments with land form carved out. Plaster mesh being laid, great fun and lovely and messy! Happy New Year to one an all.

A few more supplies purchased yesterday from Monk Bar model shop York. Now I have to say that this is a shop with very helpful staff indeed! First off I got myself a pair of Xuron track cutters. Only having ever used a razor saw to cut track, oh my word how good are these! The cut it clean and straight and they cut the rail witb very little effort, so easy. Very impressed and well worth the money. Next is point control, manual or electronic? I have decided to run a little trial with the boys before I commit on how to control the points on the layout. In particular the points that they cannot reach like in the goods yards. The first method will be electronic control. After a bit of web research and as they were cheeper, I got myself a couple of Seep point motors, the switching version. The trial will focus on the boys interaction with some form of control panel. I already have a box of push button switches, but I have also seen, on the web, SPDT (on-off-on) sprung toggle switches being used for point motiors. While in the model shop I also saw the Peco (passing contact) point switch. These look rather good as they come in different colours. The guys in the shop said that they would be better as there is less chance of point motor burn out using these, unlike the push button switch as these could accidently be held on by small fingers. So my trial will include three point on a piece of MDF and one each of the point switches. I can then see which way the boys prefer and find the easiest. But any feedback from you guys on these three switch methods would be useful too. As I am using insulfrog points I will use the Seep switch to change some LEDs on the control panel, again to help the boys know which what the point is set.

Welcome to RMWeb Johnjch2, and thanks for posting your first post to my layout topic. RMWeb is a great place to hang out for all things model railway (and the full size version too). I am glad that you find the layout design a good possibility for your own, but as you will have read I cannot take the credit for its originality . It sounds like you are on full steam ahead if you have started by building you baseboard already. I shall look forward to a possible topic of your build. As to your questions , I will try my best to answer them: 1) Yes it will be DCC, and also analogue DC. Our current layout is dual control and the main reason for this is that I have an NCE Powercab and this cannot run DC locos. As we have another family in our village with an early days layout, but only DC locos, we need to be able to run with a DC controler when they bring their locos round. I have a simple box with two switches , one to turn the NCE on and off and then other to switch between each controller powering the track. 2) No you do not need Electrofrog points if you run with DCC. However, the advantage of electrofrog is they offer better smooth and slow running, especially if you have any locos with a low number of pick up wheels. However, for me I am all insulfrog on this layout . In part because I already had them, secondly I wanted to keep the wiring simple and thirdly, I have never had any real problem with them and the locos I already have even slow running and a Hornby 0-4-0. 3) Now storage is a very good point and perhaps one I have not fully considered. Yes there would be no reason why the width of the layout could not be increased to take in a small fiddle yard, possibly coming off in the two tunnels and running behind the flyover side of the layout or even a bigger loop fiddle yard; I might sketch this up later. 4) I guess you could fit in a small station halt on the high level flyover line, perhaps where the road bridge is. There could be access from this low level road up to the station. Again I like the idea. As for the plan, more that happy for you to have a copy, but I am unsure if Anyrail can import SCARM files. Give SCARM a try, it is totally free and I have found it a really useful planning tool. Paul

Did a bit of lunchtime model shop research while I was at work today, basically because I left my wallet back at the office, doh! I did not realise there was now so much choice on track ballast. I think the last time I bought some there was just light grey and dark grey and it was pretty coarse stuff at that. Sometimes too much choice makes for a harder life, especially when you discover one particular brand of ballast contains nuts! Nuts? Ok, back to the arm chair for that one; which ballast is best? No need to answer as I am sure there are as many answers as there are colours, grade and method of glueing. But I am interested in the one made from nuts (Woodlands Scenics shaker bottles), as it is somewhat lighter in weight than real chippings. From what I saw in the shop I am leaning towards the brown colours, as these should negate the need for post track weathering. Plus, I have come up with the idea to pre spray all the track to weather it before it is fixed it in place, I am sure not an original idea, but is it a good one? Basically it means I can do it out of the house and hopefully it will be somewhat easer than trying to do it in situ. Well hopefully this weekend will see more supply shopping; timber for baseboard stiffening, card and cord underlay and some spray paint to pre weather the track. Hopefully soon the weekend 'blockade' will happen and that the TOCs won't mind not being able to run any trains for a while ;-) A couple more photos, Current and proposed layouts:

Well observed Memphis32, this is the "cheat" I mentioned in my last post. I am planning to add an extra 2" to the width of the layout, but I the have not widened the layout plan in SCARM which is still 8x4'. Basically it means I know not to go over the blue line. The basedboard will be widened outside the line.

Hi Paul I am really impressed with these coil wagon loads, they look great. So I have managed to find a source of 13A wire sold on a drum rather than the domestic repair cards, about 300m worth! And so I was wondering if you know what sort of length of wire was used for each coil? Also what was the diameter of the pipe used to wind the coils on? Cheers Paul

A bit more of an update. Printed the whole layout at 1:1 over the weekend and on the whole things looked really good; the station area especially. The curved track trough the platforms is really nice and not too tight, so much better than just straight lines. The Superquick island station structure will fit perfectly too, along this the footbridge. However, the one area that the full size prints really showed not to be working very well was the flyhover. The main issue was that the track that passes under it was too close to the track that goes over it and as a result there was no space for any retaining wall structures, so it just was not working. I have to admit that the 1:1 prints really helped to show problems that were just not apparent on the PC! I tried to various changes to the approach curves, but just could not get it to work. The result, I have had to cheat and the layout is now 8'x4'(+2") The extra 2 inches added to the long sides has made all the difference. Each inch will actually be part of a new stiffening frame I will add to the sides so that the layout can be sat on trestles. The extra 2 inches has allowed me to space out the three loops on the approach to the flyover such that things are much better now. Please let me know what you think guys. So the revised plan looks like this now (version 34, ha, ha)

Ok, may be I am just going a bit too deep and fiddling too much on this one. but I am playing with curves and trying to get the track under the the bridge at a better angle. Plus I have made the hight level line a bit more curvy. It does offer a touch more space for a signal box near the level crossing in doing so. So which is better of these two versions?

Was having a bit of a fiddle with the plan last night, in the main trying to improve the tunnel area on the left hand side of the layout (the 2 loop side). It now has a more urban feel which looks a lot better. Will post the plan once I have finished a few other minor mods. One thing I did do which really helped with visualising the layout was to print out the plan full size, never done this from SCARM before. I only printed the station area to check the approach curves and to see just how tight the curved platform looked. And it looks much better than I had hoped, it looks quite gentle; for the type of layout it is. You can look at a plan on a PC or sketch pad for as much as you like but to actually see it full size made such a difference, will go for a full print over the weekend. Sub-note, I found this a useful page on how to print fullsize (1:1) from SCARM http://www.scarm.info/blog/advanced-techniques/print-whole-layout-in-1to1-scale/

I am wanting to created a simple retaining wall for a layout plan I am developing in OO using SCARM but do not know how to create slopping objects for such thing as the buttresses. Any ideas, is it possible? And without wanting to get to complicated is it possible to create arched recesses in vertical planes? Cheers

This is a model railway that I have seen and have taken a lot of inspiration from. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/album/3800-leyburn-model-railway/ The engine shed, and goods yard are very similar to what I have ended up with. And although totally unrealistic, the tunnel in the corner just acts as a scenic break to what is just a roundy roundy It is a twin track loop layout depicting elements of Leyburn, North Yorkshire on the Redmire branch. The layout can be seen on the Wensleydale Railway at Bedale station waiting room.

Hi Zomboid, well lets hope my kids like it! I know I am quite excited about it. As for the tunnel on the right, I am hoping that side will have more of an urban feel, so I will probably have a retaining wall between the inner loop and the tunneled loop with some buildings on top. I am not that good at creating hard landscape features in SCARM, hence why it all looks very green ! The tunnel area on the left hand side will have more of a countryside feel. Yep the the curved platform is as per your original design Jon and I would be forming it from flexi track. But I think it will be worth a mock up just to see what the rolling stock swing and overhang of coaches and long bogie wagons is like in relation to the platform edge. What is you view on my addition of the curved "setrack"points to the approach of the station? I think it looks a bit more smooth and the platform is mow marginally longer now. I guess I would not normally want use these type of points, but after all we are talking about a "play" layout, so I am happy to use them.

Well I think I am getting there with this plan; in the main thanks to Jon for is plan idea. I have now added some curved points at each end of the station to try and get a bit of a flow to the approaches. Yes I know that Setracks points are tight, but I have done a bit of a test and all of our stock traversed a sequence of points OK. I think the re-build will be broken down in to two phases, the loops and then the sidings. In the main to get the layout up and running as soon as is possible, once the big blockage starts. Comments welcome on the revised plan. Green will be at approx 40mm above GL Yellow is down to Blue @ GL Red is up to high level Paul

Scenery and scenic areas is an interesting observation. I feel the layout designed by Jon gives a very good operational perspective and I am currently playing with ideas for what building and basic scenery can be developed over time. For now the key is to get all the task down to keep the trains running, scenery will develop over time, I hope. As for the future interest in modelling of the boys, who knows! All I know now is the eldest just loves coupling up trains in to long formations and playing with loads. For example after our trip to the Hartlepool show he was really taken with a steelworks based layout, such that today we made lots of load for some BDA bogie bolster wagons; takeout drink straws became pipe loads, various balsa wood section became blooms and flat plate and toy foam floor shapes got cut up and sprayed silver to became aluminium ingots.

Ok, so not going to think too much more on this one, as the plan fits, I got a bit distracted at my local model shop when out today. Having already bought some more track and points last weekend at the Hartlepool MR Show (which was a very good show) I have now bought some more bits for all the gradients on the new layout: Woodland Scenics Subterrain 2% Inclines & Risers, Metcalfe retaining wall kit and an old Tri-ang R78 plate girder bridge. I have never used Woodland Scenics polystyrene stuff before, but it looks like it will really help with getting all the gradients set up quickly. I am really pleased in finding the second hand plate girder bridge, yes I know it is very "toy" like, but there is something about it, it just looks the part and similar to most skewed intersection girder bridge I have seen out on the real railway; all big and strong looking. Plus it is very robust so will stand up to abuse on a kids layout! Before it got washed All nice and clean now This was the 3D view of the intersection bridge from the old plan So next phase it to plan the big railway "blockage" and the deconstruction of the current layout, beefing up of the current baseboard and print out the track plan. Will need to get a few more points as I intend to use Jon's plan and by the looks of it I will need a few more R2 Setrack points.

Jon_1066 that is a fantastic plan! Not sure how you did it, but you have managed to capture the essence of my original idea and turn it into a great plan that works, and works very well. Thank you. I think it is the great use of curves that make it work so well. You even managed to get in a Level Crossing, which was another stipulation from the boys. And with a bridge behind it, it looks like Northallerton, a favourite location for us. I was showing this plan to a friend last night and he noted the clever inclusion of the two goods yards, as this would mean each of my boys could have his own yard to shunt at. I guess the island platform is quite a powerful tool to economise on space, but still allow for realistic junction running. Does remind me a bit of Hellifield station? Is it time to build? One has to work fast to keep kids on board, after all they are not arm chair modelers ;-)

What a great informative topic this is for all things static grass! Thanks. Whist working out on the railways, I came across some real "static" grass. The clumps were on a disused portion of track bed adjacent to an open single line. There was a very distinct edge to the grassy area and the edge of the ballast shoulder For scale, the chair screw spikes are about 6 inch long, so the clumps in the 4th shot will just under 2mm in dia. for 4mm scale. These photos were taken in October. Hope this is of use. Paul

Modern stock, jon_1066, so the 1st radius will be an issue as you rightly say. So I am fast going backwards here! Can you expand on why the headshunt will be frustrating? Is it because it is not longer than the sidings themselves? I guess i had not really thought about this. Looking back at that plan i think my A and B are wrong on the left hand side, I will up date that image.

I have seen/had CJF book and very useful too, lost my copy a long time ago. It is amazing how some things in out hobby are timeless. As for kids playing with what I/we build, well the 5 year old is now a dab hand with coupling and tension hooks. He is Ok with my NCE Powercab and single digit loco IDs, but this helped quite a bit http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/469/entry-15952-entering-the-world-of-dcc/ with his learning the buttons. Our current main stay of fun is, as you rightly observed Kevin, loading as many wagons with 'stuff' and creating long trains. He fortunately knows the difference between his trains and Daddies 'expensive/delicate' ones. But I can hardly say no to his regular request for outings for most of my stock as I get to play with them too. One thing he is VERY good at is remembering everything I have and which draw it is in; a child's memory is so uncluttered :-) We are blessed with the eldest being more into fine detail and being gentle, than the crash bash, but as for No2, well he's just normal and in to all things!! But, at 2 and a half, he can now push is own (life expired) trains up and down the track with out too many derailments As for the long term future, well not too worried, they both seem pretty mad on trains, as most little boys are. Plus, as I work on the railways, there is no getting away from the real thing!! So if the 8x4 does fall by the wayside when teens hit, then Daddies 12x13 North Marsh Road will come in to being:. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/469-north-marsh-road-eastern-region-br-blue-oo/ something a bit like this http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/image/51197-north-marsh-road-plan-06-06-13/(that was about v3 and now I am on to v8) At the end of the day, at the moment, it all about play, creativity and fun with quite a bit learning as we go.

So here is an updated plan taking your comments into consideration. The grenn is at 30mm, the blue is a 2% down gradient to the grey which is a zero. The red is a 2% incline up to 70mm, which is max at the over bridge. I have removed the crossover and added a facing ladder, which does provide for great runing flexibility. I have also used medium radius points in the station, but kept the short radius in the goods sidings. I think I like the outcome now, it just looks better. Odd really as I originally like the idea of a crossing :-). Another option for the station junction is to move the facing ladder, but this is at expense of the clockwise platform as it just does not fit. So not sure this is really is a better solution.

Cheers guys for the comments. I take note of the crossing viewpoint, but apart from simplicity an element of prototypical ops, would there be any other reason for not using the crossing? Are they just a bad idea in terms of operation, reliability, wiring etc? I guess I just like the initial look of the junction on the original plan; so is the ladder version better or worse? Original layout simplified layout As you can see the simplified ladder layout does actually allow for longer station platforms However, this simplified version has reduced one of the "play options", the double loop same direction running capability (A-A and B- B), so is this the best option? Flexible running option Yes, I know this is not prototypical, but its what the boys like doing! And getting two trians to pass over each other on the bridge will be fun. Yes good point Zomboid I will modify the layout to use larger radius points where I can. I had just used short templates for the initial layout without thinking. We currently have a mixture of short and medium radius, so I will want to use these rather than buying more. So perhaps I will use these in the sidings area and try and get medium/large for the station. I have re-drawn the layout with the station raised by 30mm, which now gives a max gradient of 2% in any direction, so a great idea that Unravelled.

Hi Guys I am looking to redesign; my sons (two boys of 5 and 2 1/2 years old), roundy-roundy layout to try and bring in a bit more operational fun and scenic life to our train time. Currently we have an 8x4 baseboard with a twin loop, two very short sidings, a tunnel in the corner and a few second hand and new kit built buildings. In the main, this layout was thrown together a year ago with what track and points (peco setrack) I had available. Now as the eldest’s operation skills have improved, coupling, shunting, DCC and two train control, I think a layout that will be more enjoyable to run is needed. Plus, we do not have any scenery at present as I always knew it was a very temporary track plan. This is our current track plan. What this does allow is two independent train running but with the ability to switch loops. But there are no real sidings to talk of. The key thing I keep being asked is to build is a bridge, both a rail over rail and a road bridge. So therefore the new layout must have some form of track gradient. As the youngest is now showing all the signs of being “mad” on too (sorry Mummy), the new layout will still need to allow for two independent train operations; with some form of conflict protection. I had a good search on the web for 8x4, twill loop, twin level plans and came across this one. Taken from www.freetrackplans.com I really like this one as it actually offers a long single run in the form of a folded figure of eight, with some sidings for shunting and a double track station. Plus it allows for a long steady gradient between the station and the over bridge. Prototypical running is not a requirement for this layout, but fun is. 8x4 is the fixed size for now; Daddys big layout, North Marsh Road, is still being planned! So with a bit of a tweak, I came up with this as a variation, as I wanted to keep the tunnel in the corner that we have already made. The blue is low level and the red is high level. I have drawn this in SCARM, all curves are 2nd and 3rd radii and the gradients have come in at about 3.2% to 3.5%, so just about ok; that is with the over bridge having a 70mm track to track clearance. I really like the junction at the station as the layout it is a little more unseal and allows for loop switching. BUT the big thing that I have ended up with is the loops actually cross over at this point and therefore this creates a huge risk for opposing direction running conflicts (crashes) with two boys on the controllers! I currently have the NCE Powercab and will add the CAB05 Intermediate Slave later. I will also wire for full DC operation as we have some friends who do not yet have any DCC locos. So any thoughts on this plan? How can I add some form of protection to prevent head on crashes. Is there some form of automatic DCC circuit (simple) that I can employ to stop a train if the points at the junction are set against it or if there is another train about to cross its path? Comments welcome. Paul