Help with layout design
 

Hi all, i stumbled across the forum via a google search and i wondered how you guys go about designing you stations track work, i've been trying to come with some good ideas however they all seem to be lacking something (well basically they seem far to simple). I havent actually finished building my baseboard (however i shall be getting the last bits up over the weekend with the help of my granddad.

Basically my board is taking up most of a 10x7ft room and will be continuous loop, basically the main board is 10x3ft then round 7x3ft and then i will be using 10 ft wide sections to bring the track around the other side of the room angle across after 6ft and its oo gauge

Any sort of help would be great, link for inspiration or anything, cheers in advance

Mark

Hi Mark and welcome to the forum.
I am a little confused as to how you intend using the available space in your 10' x 7' room. Are you saying that there will be a 3' wide "L" shaped board around two walls of the room with narrower boards around the remaining two walls to form the continuous loop? You mention using 10 ft wide sections but could that possibly be 10 inch?
Can you give us a basic idea of the type of station you are trying to create and also if you are modelling steam days or the modern scene? It might also help if you could post some of your ideas (no matter how rough :)) as a starting point.

sorry i meant a 10ft long section, its been a very long day today at work :( yeah sure, i am going to modeling my layout in steam and sadly i cant afford to switch over to dcc just yet and plaing on running about 8/9 trains all together (i would say 5 as mainline engines).

I was thinking having some of the platforms end at the station (basically enough to hold two trains in right hand corner) and having the main lines split into another two platforms (so 3 all together so enough for 6 engines). I have also been considering having a 3rd loop to basically run off into a goods yard on the small part of the L shape (well a their is a section that forms a l that is is two 6x3 with one board having a little bit to fill in the 1ft gap).

anyways i hope thats abit more helpful

I'm sorry Mark but I must be having a senior moment as I still can't picture the exact shape of your boards in the 10' x 7' room. How much space have you allowed for the control area and how are you going to reach it? Does the room have a door?
Also, when you say that you are planning on running 8/9 trains all together, I assume that you mean you would like to have that number of trains positioned on the layout at any one time and not actually running. You would need a much bigger area than 10' x 7' in order to create a OO Gauge layout that would enable 8/9 trains to run at the same time.
If we can establish these basics then we might be able to offer some suggestions. Do you have any means of creating and posting a drawing to the forum which shows the shape of your boards?

basically atm moment i have a L shape board that is 10ft across the back wall, 6ft along the side wall while maintaining a 3ft width, basically im adding a 6x1ft board and then another board which will be at a angle to connect the smallest board with the 10ft board (at about 45o angle) think of it as a box with a small part of the corner cut off.

And no im not planning on running 8 trains on that but will have 8 trains in postion to run, as it stands i will only run two trains at a time just via platforms, sidings, goods area and possible engine storage yard i will have 8/9 trains on the board.

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...an054/mark.jpg

My paint skills rock btw ;)

For the mainline i have

1) Britannia
1) rebuilt royal scot
1) A3
1) rebuilt merchant navy
1) possibly one A4, im still undecided as if i will i just sell this or replace it, i have a rather old tender driven one

Other than that i have
1) crab
1) 9F
1) stainier
1) smokey joe (simply because it was the first train i was ever bought)

That's great. I'll try and get the creative juices flowing :D

Hi Mark, welcome to the forum.
After seeing your layout diagram I presume there is a door at bottom left. The room is the same size as I used in the past. First thing to think about is that door and how it opens; most doors open to mask the room interior as they open, in other words, the door hinges are near the middle of your left hand wall. I would suggest that the door is rehung so that the hinges are at the bottom left corner, then the door opens back against the bottom wall.
Once this has been done, a lifting section can be constructed to allow the door to open/close. It gives you much more space for your layout. As it stands the angle at the top corner will not allow a double track curve, try it with set-track number 2 curves as the inside track and you will see what I mean.
If you need help with the design of the lifting section, just ask!
Wishing you the best of luck with your plans.

well basically the door isnt a problem as it hardly opens into the room (the entrance to room is rather odd) however i have to leave enough room in the corner for a book case to put all my table top figures on (so i can adjust this part slightly). What would be a better angle to allow for a double curve?

Anyways thanks guys for the interest so far :)

This is the sort of plan that I was considering. Based on an 18" radius inner curve I thought that it might work but as Tony points out there could be a problem. After being in N-Gauge for 30+ years my mind doesn't work too well in OO:)
Attachment 522

thats actually now a bad basis :) the curve might work better if i make the section 2 across 3 up slightly wider, i could add a 1X2 bit onto the main board which might give it a little more room to turn.

I think i would also shrink the stations down slightly as im only going to be using 4 coaches per train.

Cheers mate :)

If you're happy to run shorter trains then you should have more space for extra sidings etc. Please keep us informed of your progress.

Well i dont think its a major issue, i did have a play test with a few longer trains however it just tookup to much of the board and made the layout look too cramped. I will have a play XtrakCad and develop he idea abit.

Oh for the joys of modern technology. I'm still using good old paper and pencil:D

well i think pencil and paper has its advantages! the program is ok however i have no idea how to use damn flexi track in it, the crossover according to the program wont be able to actually do what i want...

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...054/Mark-1.jpg

Well heres a rough idea of what i might do, i do feel however im not using some of the space in the greatest of way :(

Hi Mark,

Welcome to the Forum.

It looks as if your layout design is beginning to come together. I think you are wise to limit train length to 4 coaches. I have done the same with my new layout (See my thread the Will Valley Railway.) The station I have shown the plan for is the branch off a branch and would generally only receive two coach loco hauled trains although there is scope for longer DMU trains.

Once you have your baseboards I think it is worth doing what I have done, laying any old sectional track you might have plus use the full size Peco drawing of their various points. It is amazing how your ideas change as you shuffle everything around and hopefully it might avoid some fasle starts!

I also have the rest of the layout drawn out full size on Wallpaper backing paper, again using the Peco drawings and some of my sectional track. It also means you can put some stock and buildings on which further shows how it might look.

Anyway keep sharing your ideas (as I will be doing with my Will Valley thread)

Good Luck and have fun.

Best wishes,

John H-T.

Hey thanks for the tips John, i will certainly keep those in mind for when i get started over the weekend, it is a shame that i cant get away with the larger coaches but i guess on the brightside its going to save me abit extra cash :) I did come across a layout design someone suggested to me some time ago (when i was living in london) and actually thought it would make far better use of the space:)

http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/3285/10x6ql3.jpg

I dont think it would need all that much adjustment and might suit my plains far better! Im not so sure about the second layer however

Looks quite a good plan and don't be put off by the second layer as long as you don't make the incline too steep, My new layout is planned to include two layers. It adds more interest. Many layouts are level which makes them less interesting.

As far as four coach trains are concerned I think they are long enough to creat the illusion of length without causing too many problems with run rounds, head shunts etc.

Layout design, I think, is all about creating illusions to try and make things look bigger than they are. Trains disappearing for a bit help this.

Best wishes,

John H-T.

Well i might give it a try, i think last time me and my granddad tried a 2nd layer (was many years ago) most of locos we had were tender driver and just couldnt coupe with a 2nd layer. If i do a 2nd layer i will certainly have to alter that one abit as that would come over the lift up section.

You certainly make a good point about illusion aspect which i have noticed when going to exhibition, cheers for the input John :)

Well tomorrow will be a busy day! now just have to make a list of what extra track i need!

Mark, I think that this is basically a good plan. My only concern is that the crossover between the upper two terminus tracks is positioned so that only the shortest of OO locos could be used and the crossover between the lower two terminus tracks is even shorter.
As you are having four terminus tracks I would also suggest that you have them facing in opposite directions. This would mean that a train could leave one pair of terminus tracks, do several circuits of the main loop before coming to rest in the other pair of terminus tracks. After running round it could then return.............I think it is always better if a train actually has somewhere to go, that's why so many modellers incorporate branch lines into their layouts and incorporate hidden storage sidings into their continuous loops.
As regards effective use of space I don't think it does too bad except for the area below the main station although you do need to avoid overcrowding and leave some space for scenic detail.
A possible way of utilising this area would be to expand the turntable and it's tracks into a proper engine shed area with plenty of storage space for your collection of locos which will inevitably grow over the years;)
Hope you don't mind but I have taken your original plan and added my suggestions to give you some idea of what I mean....sorry about my poor quality graphic skills.
Attachment 523

It's a nice enough design but unless you can modify it to suit your requirements without having gradients that are too steep I would stick with a single-level layout. The gradient in the plan appears to be about 1 in 27 which I think is far too steep for all but the shortest trains even with traction tyres. You will get more enjoyment from a reliable single-level layout than an unreliable two-level one.

One more problem with the track plan is that it is in someone's imagination! The pointwork from the station throat (bottom right) to the sidings shows six pionts in series. With a medium radius point being 8.5 inches long, that means point array length of 51 inches, not the approx 3 feet shown!
Even in some track plan books, not enough room is allowed for pointwork. The best way of planning is to put actual track onto your baseboard roughly into the position you have in mind. You will be surprised at how quickly your "big" baseboard dissapears and how little you can get into 10 x 7.
Don't be tempted to use "settrack" points to save space; not many locos will go through them.

Good point Tony (sorry about the pun:)). I wonder if it started life as an N-Gauge trackplan?

Yes John, more than likely!

thats not all that bad mate and actually looks alot more reasonable to do than the other one!, with the crossovers it was merely a case of finding something that would actually link together, when using the medium points for some reason it would work (when you bear in mind im going to be using flexitrack rather than set track in many places).

You make a good point about the multi layer which was something i was concerned about from past experience, infact when we last tried it about the only train that would actually make the climb was my old triang britannia (now that was a beast!). I have noticed the newer engines still lack the power of the much older stuff (but they do look so much nicer!).

I think i might move the points on the left hand side as thinking about it they are on the flip section, not a great idea.. i can just see my cousin rushing in and flip it up without even thinking about the trucks on the siding, reminds me off the time he drove my royal scot off the table (btw anyone know a place i can get a replacement body :( ).

Anyways thanks for all the imput here, i think you have saved me some time and money!

I got one of those for Christmas about 50 years ago. It came in a set with three Pullman coaches. I thought it was brilliant but as you say, compared with today's models, they were pretty basic.

Don't know if this idea would help (and I don't really know if I should muddy the waters, given my all too infrequent visits here these days :D ), but if space is a problem, I've always been quite partial to the idea of just modelling the platform ends of a station, with a tunnel exit/entrance at the other end. You could use the intervening space as a fiddle yard and disguise the front of the intervening space with low relief houses/ townscape etcetera. It doesn't really solve the problem of train length, but the extra sidings which could be added would help a bit with stock storage.

I'll leave the regulars to think about the details!

Should be able to visit with a bit more regularity after my last essay goes in...10th December. :)

Hi Trev,
Have I missed something? It sounds like you've been doing some studying.
(apologies for going OT but I'm nosey:))

well sadly we didnt endup working on this over the weekend, i had the joy of having my appendix being removed instead, good fun and great timing :(

Sorry to hear that Mark. Your grandfather is obviously a very versatile chap;)

well could have been alot worse, im just annoyed with the damn timing, i guess there is always next weekend :) i guess i can just sit back and let someone else do the hardwork :)

After looking at several different stations over the internet i think i noticed one thing, they actually look nothing like the one in the plan :( from all the sources i have looked it it seemed the most common station would only really hold two trains at a time.

As you can tell i have far to much time on my hands ( i hate being ill, so boring and i just cant bare to watch day time tv). I guess its back to basic's then.

That's very true but initially you asked for a plan that would accommodate more than two trains (8 or 9 in fact) so that's what we gave you. It now appears that realism is higher on your list of priorities than first thought so I would suggest going with the type of layout that has a visible (but heavily compressed) station with several storage sidings hidden behind a backscene. Possibly along the lines of Trev's suggestion.

this is the problem when you have to much time sitting in bed :( you start to nit pick things to fill your time, i was thinking that if i add in a second level i could have some storage sidings hidden under here.

The problem is i dont want to start building and in a months time be unhappy with what i have been putting together.