Chimer

As I can never leave well alone, I've modded my last design to include your fiddle yards, sort of ....... Green tracks are set-track points and curves, blue streamline points and flexi (24" radius streamline points in the FY area). The differences are: a gentler curve bottom right, hence a streamline point where you've used set-track; sidings instead of loops on the nearside of the main line FY (I thought the loops too short to be useful; different arrangement of the curves top left, and therefore position of branch FY. The scenic treatment I offer for consideration is a road bridge providing the scenic break bottom right, and high ground with tunnels top left. I'm not I'd bother with the run-round I've shown in the branch FY, again because of the shortness of the loop. Easier to use a locolift to shift an engine from one end to the other, I reckon. Only thinking aloud, you're doing just fine by yourself!! Cheers, Chris

You could do the same thing at the other end of that loop too .....

That's so obvious, and yet I've never considered it ...... thanks DCB!

Contrariwise, I reckon using a larger radius Streamline point as the last 12 degrees of an otherwise set-track single track curve would count as a desirable transition to the following straight.

As you have shown, but it does require extra care to keep the curves smooth, especially if you have to join two pieces of flexi somewhere around the curve. Whereas set-track curves are dead simple to lay and in my experience perfectly reliable And I wouldn't really disagree with any of that, except to say that the incompatability issue is more to do with track spacing than turnout angles - 2" for Streamline, 2.625" for Set-track. For a double track system, set-track radii require set-track spacing, so set-track points conform to that (and using Streamline points involves lots of jiggling). But for a single track set-up, using set-track curves (cut short if necessary) for tight bends and Streamline points and flexi everywhere else will work perfectly well and (imho) look much better due to the reduced turnout angle.

Re curving the bay:

At first glance ........ assuming access to the top of the helix is via a double junction off the main line at the high level (?), the answer must be "Yes", all 10 roads running the same way. If you were using two junctions and two helixes (helices?) then 5 each way would be an option. Best of luck with the build.

If I've got the dimensions right, and interpreted other peoples' comments properly (neither of which I'm sure of), how would this go down? 1 foot squares, Peco medium (and one curved) points. 46" and 48" radii through the platforms. Add goods yard to taste ......

You could ease the platform radii another smidge if a train leaving the inner platform went straight at a left-hand point instead of right at a right-hand one - which is much easier drawn than said ... Not sure about the facing point leading directly into the headshunt though. Think the earlier arrangement needing a set back into the yard is more likely, with the bulk of an anti-clockwise freight being left in the platform during shunting ops.

Moving the points is obviously possible, but I'm away from my planning software and generally off-line until the weekend. Note that that junction is non-prototypical so better hidden, but I'll see what I can do. From the storage sidings on the right, you need to be able to get trains running clockwise on the outer circuit, which means the loco will be up against the buffers in the sidings. So you reverse the train out of the sidings, stop it on the hidden single track at the top, then run it forwards out of the tunnel on the "branch line", over the bridge or whatever which is the lift out section / duck under on the right and onto the outer main line via the single slip. To get back to the sidings in due course, after as many circuits as you like, it just takes a left at "cupboard junction". For a train running anti-clockwise on the inner circuit, the brake van will be against the buffers, so the train just runs forward from the sidings and gets onto the inner main line via the crossover at "cupboard junction". It gets back by taking the branch line as it leaves the station, over the single slip, stopping on the hidden single track at the top, and reversing back into the siding. A bit complicated, but it means that whenever you can see a train, it's doing what it ought to be doing, on the correct track ..... Obviously multiple unit and/or push-pull trains can run both ways in a single session, otherwise you're limited by where the loco sits to a train going one way or the other until you move over to the sidings and have a fiddle (!) Hope this helps - until Friday! Chris

I don't know any way of converting XTrackCad to Anyrail, but I can do you a parts list: Count | Description ------+-------------------------------------- 1 | Peco SL-80 Single Slip, Insulfrog 1 | Peco SL-86 Curved Right Turnout 1 | Peco SL-87 Curved Left Turnout 2 | Peco SL-88 RH Long Turnout, Insulfrog 2 | Peco SL-89 LH Long Turnout, Insulfrog 6 | Peco SL-95 RH Medium Turnout 3 | Peco SL-96 LH Medium Turnout 1 | Peco SL-97 Short Y Turnout 0 | 1443.459 OO Flex Track ------+--------------------------------------- The long turnouts are all in the right hand station throat, the curved ones form the crossover to the left of the station. They're all shown as Insulfrog but you can substitute Electrofrog if you wish (I would, except for the Single Slip!). I've no idea what the units are for the flexitrack, 14m doesn't feel like enough. With a bit of fudging, you could probably use Set-track 3rd and 4th radius for the curves into the storage sidings, which would make it easier to keep things smooth as derailments there would be a real pain. Cheers, Chris

Hi David I'm completely onside with the idea of a double track mainline with two trains circulating while you shunt or just watch. Double track because seeing trains passing one another is particularly pleasing. You can find many of my efforts to that end in here, mostly aiming at a space a bit shorter than yours (14' x 8' ish) but without the complication of that pesky door in the corner. But if you want to see some variety in the "two trains circulating", you either need a fiddle yard (which is simple and takes up a moderate amount of space which is completely wasted from the scenic point of view) or a visible MPD, carriage sidings and goods yard, which take up a huge amount of space to render properly. Hawkesbury, for which I accept some responsibility , is a shot at the second option, but the MPD and carriage sidings, though hopefully functional, are not in any way prototypical. So here's an alternative baseboard setup and skeleton layout to confuse you (1 foot grid squares). The sidings on the right are non-scenic storage sidings rather than a fiddle yard, unless you have a second operator who can stay over that side and fiddle. From the sidings, a train gains the inner circuit via the crossover in the cupboard, returning via the branchline and a reverse in the hidden section at the top. For the outer circuit it reverses in the hidden section first and joins via the branchline, returning via the cupboard. Trains can reverse in the station, using the trailing crossovers to gain the correct line on departure. You can probably fit in an MPD and/or a goods yard somewhere, although arranging decent prototypical access will, as always, be a pain! Best of luck, Chris

I see a space for an O gauge inglenook ....,

I wrote this after your Thursday post, but obviously never sent it ........ probably too late now!! "Looking at the middle photo, I'd be awfully tempted to have the narrow gauge running through a tunnel parallel to the canal tunnel (as well as escaping through the factory) ..... sorry . Also, I wonder if the narrow gauge isn't too close to the quayside at the moment - you'll need space for cranes (and people safely) between the two?" Moving swiftly on, I think you may struggle to make the brewery courtyard work as you've got it there. Having the entry to the brewery as the scenic break would be simpler - no reason why the narrow gauge wouldn't run right through the brewery site and continue on to the slate mine. You could use the space where the brewery buildings are now for a narrow gauge depot of some sort - shed, workshop etc. Yours confusingly, Chris

Jules, the only functional differences in the 009 between your sketch and my v2 are my kickback siding into the corner and you retaining the loop from my v1 which I changed into a siding for v2. I don't think I've allowed enough space on the right hand side for the canal and the buildings behind it - can you tell me the exact distance from the near baseboard edge in the last pic to the near side of the canal? And what trackwork are you going to be using - I'm going to have to get the points right to do things accurately. I'm not certain the pointwork will fit as you have sketched it, but that does depends on the points radius. I'm not sure that the fan of standard gauge sidings in the top left of the basin adds anything, can't see any function for them beyond somewhere to dump trucks .......... when I first saw them I though they were just bits of discarded track! Cheers, Chris

Maybe too late now, but just for completeness, here is an improved version of my original approach. I did briefly consider dual gauge along the canal wharf, but thought in model form it might be too difficult. Cheers, Chris

Could work, but not easy to get a track from the side of the canal to the 45 degree baseboard corner, though the kickback partially solves that. You'll need a big crane to shift cargo from canal to standard gauge. Not a lot of operational scope for the 009, but perhaps enough for proof of concept. I think your first idea was better ...... using sharp 009 curves in the canal basin area gives you more options than if you leave the standard gauge in there. In my opinion .......

Quick and dirty, developing our PM discussion ....... I've used 00 set-track points for the 009 section (in blue) as I didn't want to load more parameter files into XTC. Green is lifted track to make room for the interchange platform (which could also offer end loading for standard gauge vehicles). The idea is to suggest the 009 goes on to something significant (docks, quarry, colliery) beyond the canal basin, which justifies the narrow-gauge railway (which a link from the canal basin to Hawkesbury goods yard certainly wouldn't, on its own). You might be able to use a cassette to swop stock around there .... Think I should have added an extra crossover between the two canal sidings to form another run-round loop, but will leave that for another day. Hope this generates some debate! Chris P.S. You might want to ask the Mods to move this back to "Layout and Track Design" or start a new thread there?

I'm not sure about the need for the path from the top junction platform to the branch through the right hand throat , or the facing crossover approaching the junction from the branch (deleting both would save 4 points and 3 diamonds!) but that does look like a lot of fun for varied passenger operations.

Interestingly, given that Peco are normally kind to themselves when quoting radii, if you remove a double slip and replace it with a simple curve, the curve comes out at 43" radius. Obviously the difference is down to the straight sections beyond the frogs, but I wonder if the tightness of the slip radius is that obvious to the eye, especially as there is only a 12 degree deviation? Never laid one myself, so must try to remember to have a look at an exhibition, come the day ...... In any event, the slip makes the throat pointwork look suitably impressive .....

Lyneworth High Level (linked by footpath and subway to the main line platforms) in the bottom right hand corner? Sticking the backscene on the branchline viaduct / lifting flap, hiding the tight curves and crossover on the main line, is a really cool idea ......

We're thinking very similarly it seems. For me there is much more point to the branch if it serves the MPD and carriage sidings - not sure it needs to be double track though. The peninsula idea avoids the unlikely proximity of Millhampton to the main line, and I would suggest the loops section along the bottom wall is left in the open and sceniced - masquerading as a section of 4-track main line, albeit with parked trains. I suspect Clive would prefer 4 platforms at Lyneworth, though that would squeeze the space for the goods yard / brewery sidings, and I think the trailing crossovers there need to be at the outer edges of the station limits to allow trains to reverse and cross to the other line. My first attempt to give Lyneworth 4 platforms ran out of space (in 18 feet!!!) but I might have another play incorporating the peninsula idea, if @Zomboid will waive copyright ......

I'm not sold on the idea of something that looks like a double track line until you see trains moving wrong line .... so I think maybe I'd completely lose the inner track bottom left, feeding the branch platform at the junction off the outer track using a curved point, and get as much separation as possible between the main and branch lines bottom right. And possibly swap over the goods yard and station at the terminus to get more distance between the platforms at the two stations. But lots of operational fun. And even allowing for the fact that in HOe things are going to be more cramped than they would have been in N, I think it may actually look rather better that way ......

Re your reference to @Zomboid's comment, that's exactly what my design is seeking to achieve ...... On the wider points, you've been running trains in the garage for a while now, so presumably have encountered the dust and dampness issues and know what you need to do. Is there still a full garage-width door as well as the one you're planning to use for normal access? The thought of having to unbox/box stock before and after a running session does not appeal to me one little bit. Locos, if stored on locolifts, maybe. Passenger and freight stock - urrrgh. My design assumes quite a lot of stock is around to work to its potential. In my opinion, you need some hidden storage on the layout to get any variety of operation within a single running session. Let's say you're running a passenger train on the inner circuit. You maybe change the engine a couple of times ........ then you want to run a freight. Where does it appear from? And how do you get the passenger out of the way to give the freight a path? The answer has to involves storage loops or sidings, hidden or in plain view. And "in plain view" takes up a lot more scenically developed space to look at all realistic. Hidden loops also means train A doesn't have to go round and round and round, you can alternate with train B (and C and D if you have more loops). If you want things to be more realistic, you stick crossovers on the ends of the loop section so that having seen a loco/train running clockwise, you can next see it running anti-clockwise, though this involves more fiddling and turning of stock. (Phil has shown this arrangement in his latest iteration, I didn't 'cos it won't fit easily). All that said, I did do a design for @halsey of this parish (Search "Hawkesbury") which didn't involve storage loops which he has actually built and seems happy with. Omitting the loops in my latest design for you would give more space to extend Lyneworth's station throats to allow two platforms (aka visible storage loops) in each direction. Decisions, decisions .....

Of course - I was looking for a direct route to the bay (e.g. facing point and single slip). Post in haste, repent at leisure!!