The Eagle has landed...

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Right then, Father's Day apparently so I was able to legitimately spend time in the shed.  I got the work bench finished, just need a decent office type chair.  I wonder if work would miss one?

 

 

Then I sent a happy couple of hours seeing what the planned yard would look like, both from an operating point of view and photographically.  Not too bad, I think.  Capacity is actually only 25 cars not 35 - I can squeeze in 27 but that's cutting it fine on the clearance points which as a a proto operator I won't do.  The yard lead holds two six-axle diesels comfortably, so that's all good.

 

 

 

there was room for an extra industry alongside the lead.

 

 

The rolling stock hasn't seen light of day for a while, and looks rather old fashioned and lacking in detail.  Ho hum, 'three foot rule' and all that.

 

 

 

Altogether a splendid couple of week's progress.  I'm working away from home all next week, so there won't be any progress until the following weekend.  And that's dependent on getting some more track delivered.  

 

Isn't it amazing how much stuff even a small layout needs?  I don't envy the lads with their big 'uns to build...

Edited June 15, 2014 by Dr Gerbil-Fritters

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Before I lay the track properly, I've been trying to work out what I should use to represent the roadbed.... even in the desert states and in yards track is not laid directly on the ground, so I'd like to use something between the ply and the track.  Noise reduction is a bonus, but not essential.  Height, ease of use and dimensional stability are essential.

 

Anyone got any thoughts on 3mm Diall Foam Flooring Underlay from B&Q, or the 2mm Whire Polystyrene Veneer from Wickes?

 

Previously I'd had a go with cork, and didn't really like it.  

[Allegheny1600]

Hi Doc,

From my own experiences, I can quite happily recommend this: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=437_439

As in the foam underlay!

I would definitely advise against both the products you have linked to but especially don't use that Wickes stuff! I wouldn't even recommend it for its intended purpose of wall insulation, it's so poor!

It is quite a subjective and emotive subject and one might ask, what exactly do you want from your underlay?

Just for the elevation it gives or for sound deadening, or a bit of both.

I like a bit of both!

The "quality" type of foam from C&L I linked to does give best results when using copydex glue as PVA can make everything solid and you're back to noisy again!

Some prefer cork, others use balsa sheet! I would say any cork underlay needs to be a minimum of 3mm thick and rubberised is possible.

Hope that helps!

John E.

[dave1905]

One thing some of the people in the US use is "Camper topper tape".  It is foam tape about 1.5-2" wide that is self adhesive on one side.  It is used to seal the joint where a cover (camper topper) is put over a pick up truck bed.  It is sold at recreational vehicle supply stores and dealers.  While recreational vehicles probably aren't  abig thing in the UK, there probably are companies that sell covers for pick up truck beds, they would probably have that tape.

[Andy Reichert]

John Wright used some green topped foam rubber underlay material available in the UK for the successor to "Federal St. I think he used it for Fed St. as well,

 

 

I use 1/8 natural foam rubber strips. They are very accurately flat and stable, yet quieting. I'm not a believer in the very thick ballasted roadbed that is very common on most US based layouts. It just seems so high compared to the real tracks I go by every day.

 

Andy

Edited June 16, 2014 by Andy Reichert

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

I got busy laying track and having a bit of a play today.  I've already partially dismantled the version seen here.  I'm not sure why, but it didn't look right - I don't know if the tracks are too close together, or there is too much track on the ground, but it just didn't really look convincing.  Perhaps one of you chaps will have a suggestion.

 

Anyway, the pictures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[shortliner]

I suspect all track and no space for anything else - fine in real life ( with much apparent space), but too "scrunched up" on a narrowish board - it makes the proportions wrong visually. Sometimes it is better to loose a track (or two) to improve the appearance - unless you are deliberately modelling a restricted urban space - which is why I like planning in XTrkCad

Edited June 23, 2014 by shortliner

[trisonic]

I dunno about the design and defer to Jack but those Peco “points” don’t look convincing - some of them seem to bend (the “blades”) every which way...

 

Best, Pete.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Pete, yes they are pretty dreadful aren't they?  

 

I intend to replace them all with decent ones built from a mixture of components (P87, Details West etc), but I wanted to get something up and running quickly after a decade of no model railway!

 

I have downloaded the UPRR track configuration diagrams and shall relay my industrial tracks to proper standards, and thin out the trackage a bit.

[roundhouse]

They are not so bad once the sides of the rails have been painted and the track weathered.

 

Ian

[Gary H]

A very enjoyable thread Dr!

Can I ask what is the size of the layout please?

Looks like about 8 x 12 feet ish.

What would be your choice of plain line and points if time permitted?

I once tried some Micro Engineering flex track but no matter how hard I tried, I couldn't get a nice curve with the stuff and it ended up looking like a dogs hind leg! Im not really sure what the secret is with that stuff to be honest!

I also use Peco C83 points, less than ideal but probably the best if you need speed I think. They don't look to bad once they are painted ballasted.

I suspect the Fast Tracks jigs would be my choice if I were to start over.

 

Reference the foam underlay, I used neoprene on a previous layout, the stuff wetsuits are made of. Was fairly difficult to get hold of though.

On my American layout, I used the Woodland scenic stuff which I think is 'OK'.

Edited June 23, 2014 by Gary H

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

I've seen Mike's work, very inspirational.  Once I've had some fun running, I shall be going back and replacing the turnouts for something a little more bodacious.

 

Gary H, the dimensions are 7'6" by 13' 6" - your guestimate was pretty close!  Actually, it was one of your photos on the old old RMWeb that convinced me that Peco turnouts would be 'ok' at least in the interim.  If I find it, I'll repost it here as it was a pretty good rendition of US track as I recall.

 

I had a bit of a play this evening, and have an idea in mind which should work - pictures in the next few days.  It's funny that I've fallen into the trap of putting too much track on the deck - as I am one of the 'evangelists' for minimal trackage as per the prototype....

 

see petard, will hoist.

 

Thanks for all the input chaps, finally I don't feel like a non-layout owning fraud. posting away...

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Gary H, it was one of your photos on the old old RMWeb that convinced me that Peco turnouts would be 'ok' at least in the interim.  If I find it, I'll repost it here as it was a pretty good rendition of US track as I recall.

 

 

This was the photo that gave me some confidence that Pecos can look ok when painted and ballasted carefully...

 

 

I'd love to know what paints/ballast/technique were used.

[Gary H]

Dr Gerbil-Fritters, on 23 Jun 2014 - 20:49, said:

I've seen Mike's work, very inspirational.  Once I've had some fun running, I shall be going back and replacing the turnouts for something a little more bodacious.

 

Gary H, the dimensions are 7'6" by 13' 6" - your guestimate was pretty close!  Actually, it was one of your photos on the old old RMWeb that convinced me that Peco turnouts would be 'ok' at least in the interim.  If I find it, I'll repost it here as it was a pretty good rendition of US track as I recall.

Speak as I find, they've been 100% reliable in operation, mine are all Electrofrog with the over centre springs removed and powered by Tortoise motors.

I think in regard to ready to run, they're the best of a bad bunch. I do wish I'd hand built though like I did with my long departed UK based layout.

As regard to retro fitting now, I don't think I could face it!

[Gary H]

Dr Gerbil-Fritters, on 24 Jun 2014 - 12:31, said:

This was the photo that gave me some confidence that Pecos can look ok when painted and ballasted carefully...

 

BALLAST005.jpg

 

I'd love to know what paints/ballast/technique were used.

Crikey, that is an old pic from the early days. That track is totally unchanged though.

It was air brushed with Phoenix Precision paints (enamel) sleeper grime and the rail sides airbrushed with a rust shade, nothing out of the ordinary there.  also used that rail sides painter wheel thing with acrylic paint for some of it which was also quite successful.

I then just ballasted it using a 50/50 mix of Woodand Scenics fine "grey" and "light grey" ballast. I then used a pipete to soak it with 50/50 IPA and water before going over it again with the time honoured diluted PVA.

To be honest if I were to do it all again, I don't think I'd use WS ballast. Due to its ground down husk material, its to light in weight compared with a proper ground down stone ballast and it takes some patience when it comes to gluing the stuff. There's a U.S firm whose name escapes me now that sells proper stone ballast of differing shades depending on the geographical area you are modelling- that's if you want to go that far!

My sidings were treated differently though in that I used stone ballast / dirt for the most part.

[shortliner]

There's a U.S firm whose name escapes me now that sells proper stone ballast of differing shades depending on the geographical area you are modelling- that's if you want to go that far!

My sidings were treated differently though in that I used stone ballast / dirt for the most part.

 

Arizona Rock & Mineral Company?  http://www.rrscenery.com/

Edited June 24, 2014 by shortliner

[Gary H]

shortliner, on 24 Jun 2014 - 13:36, said:

Arizona Rock & Mineral Company?  http://www.rrscenery.com/

Yeah, that's one of em Jack and would suffice perfectly, Ive bought some "aggregate" from them myself in the past!

Im sure there's another one though but knowing me I could also be confusing ARMC with "the other one".

Im getting to that age and im on nights this week which  doesn't help!

[shortliner]

Been there, Done that, Nowadays given it up!

[Andy Reichert]

Still trying to figure out a way of electro-depositing ballast so it goes where it should automatically. And NEVER where it shouldn't.

 

Not worked out so far. . . .

 

Andy

[EmporiaSub]

I once tried some Micro Engineering flex track but no matter how hard I tried, I couldn't get a nice curve with the stuff and it ended up looking like a dogs hind leg! Im not really sure what the secret is with that stuff to be honest!

 

I have some ME Code 70 and 55 track, and agree it is not easy to lay, as regards curves. The 55 can easily pop out of the chairs as well.

I've kept mine purely for siding and spur tracks, shame really as the Code 70 looks so much better.

[Gary H]

EmporiaSub, on 25 Jun 2014 - 10:16, said:

I have some ME Code 70 and 55 track, and agree it is not easy to lay, as regards curves. The 55 can easily pop out of the chairs as well.

I've kept mine purely for siding and spur tracks, shame really as the Code 70 looks so much better.

Funnily enough, that's what I done with the few bits of it I had. It got used for staging track. Shame really as it does look very nice.

[Gary H]

I dunno about the design and defer to Jack but those Peco “points” don’t look convincing - some of them seem to bend (the “blades”) every which way...

 

Best, Pete.

That's the biggest gripe about the things. Those horrible pressed out hinged switch blades!

[Andy Reichert]

That's the biggest gripe about the things. Those horrible pressed out hinged switch blades!

 

Pressed out may be ugly, but "hinged" is as they should be, for representing most US track.  It's only in the last decade, or in special circumstances, that new US turnouts have been laid, fitted with flex points.

 

Andy

Edited June 26, 2014 by Andy Reichert

[MikeHohn]

You might have already removed some track , but to me the problem seems in part to be that you shortened the whole yard compared to the track plan you posted on May 11. The whole arrangement looks foreshortened, but that could be the effect of the photos. Can you move the yard throat to lengthen the tracks?

 

Mike

 

I got busy laying track and having a bit of a play today.  I've already partially dismantled the version seen here.  I'm not sure why, but it didn't look right - I don't know if the tracks are too close together, or there is too much track on the ground, but it just didn't really look convincing.  Perhaps one of you chaps will have a suggestion.

 

Anyway, the pictures.

 

shed 25.jpg

 

shed 26.jpg

 

shed 27.jpg

 

shed 28.jpg

 

shed 29.jpg

 

shed 30.jpg

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

You might have already removed some track , but to me the problem seems in part to be that you shortened the whole yard compared to the track plan you posted on May 11. The whole arrangement looks foreshortened, but that could be the effect of the photos. Can you move the yard throat to lengthen the tracks?

 

Mike

 

 

It's foreshortened - it's a telephoto shot from standing outside the shed!  The turnout that feeds the yard tracks sits on the centre line of the shed, giving a lead slightly longer than the longest yard track so I can pull a whole cut of cars.

 

Currently I have rearranged the tracks to this arrangement...

 

 

Almost a full Mindheim!