Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 8 Jan 2011 23:23 from: rovex click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
This is a first attempt at a plan for a new layout I hope to build (once I've built the shed to put it in), its loosely based on the old Birmingham Snow Hill, but much reduced and because the station throat has to be on a curve the point work has had to be simplified, for example the tracks which cross from the bottom of the station to the carriage sidings which will be top right when drawn are going to have to be omitted. I've not mastered the finer points of the system such as shoving timbers or doing three way points properly, but any comments gratefully accepted. regards Rovex |
||
| Attachment: attach_965_1332_snow_hill.box 426 | |||
|
posted: 9 Jan 2011 10:02 from: JFS
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Wow, lots of track! Should be an excellent operational layout when its done. Just one tip which I learnt the hard way. There might be a fair few devils in the detail of your plan in that some of the track might not be buildable - just to take one one of the three ways in the throat - the switches of one road overlap the crossing of the other. This kind of problem of course is MUCH worse in 00 than in nearer-scale guages - even formations which would fit in the prototype cannot be built in the model. 1129_090455_280000000.png  The worry is that you might not uncover all of these until you get deep into the detail of partial templates,by which time it is impossible to move stuff about to make the necessary space - or even worse, you discover that there is not enough room to fit things into the available space. (as I say, I learned that the hard way!) My suggestion would be to go through the plan looking at all the "complex" formations and work out all the clearance needed to build them. You might be a bit surprised at just how many changes are needed, but you will save much grief later! Good luck getting it all built! |
||
|
posted: 9 Jan 2011 16:17 from: rovex click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Thanks for the advice, I dealt with the one your pinpointed by seperating the three way point in to two points. I'll have a look at the rest. | ||
|
posted: 12 May 2011 18:20 from: rovex click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
This is the updated version of the trackplan for Brackhampton The shed arrives soon and hopefully I can start getting the baseboards constructed. In the meantime I'm starting getting track built Any comments gratefully received Rovex |
||
| Attachment: attach_1061_1332_snow_hill_25-4-2011.box 326 | |||
|
posted: 12 May 2011 21:39 from: JFS
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi there, It looks like you have combed out a fair few of the things I noticed before! One VERY big worry has to be the diamonds / slips on very tight curves and with fixed 1:7 elbows. I would be really worried about these even in P4 and in 00 the problem is much worse because of the over-wide flange ways. If you look at template 220 for example, I don't think there is room for the elbow guard - you would need moveable elbows. If I were you, I would have a go at building a couple of the tightest ones straight off the template on to a "test plank", throw your 28XX and 5 dozen long wheelbase wagons at it, and see how it works. If you build the whole layout and then discover snags, you will have a BIG problem! Good Luck! |
||
|
posted: 12 May 2011 23:10 from: rovex click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Thanks I've chickened out of building the pointwork myself and have a contact buildingit for me. So far he's built the scissor crossovers in the middle. I've tried to keep the curves as gentle as I can, but of course with such a large layout sacrifices have to be made. I'll raise the issues of the slips with him. Any other particular ones to be wary of? Thanks again Rovex |
||
|
posted: 13 May 2011 06:46 from: roythebus
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
On the right end of the plan, have you considered curving the platforms gently, that way you will have a larger radius on all the curves there. There's very little straight track on the real railway! | ||
|
posted: 13 May 2011 08:04 from: rovex click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Very true and after I'd dne the first track plan I found that the four main lines through the station have a very shallow curve on them, but as the overall roof was going to be a tough build anyway without coping with a curve as well I kept them straight. We've not built anything for this end yet. I'll give it a go. Thanks Rovex |
||
|
posted: 13 May 2011 09:31 from: Jim Guthrie
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Rovex, From recent experience, I would agree with JFS on testing the diamonds to make sure that they will work before going much further.. At the moment I am building a diamond with two curved roads in S scale, and the curves are very tight for S scale. I am on my second attempt to get it working well and I think I have achieved that. I am now going to set up a test on the board I am building it on and use a locomotive under power with long wheelbase stock to make sure it works under normal operating conditions before laying it down on the layout. The delay is making some long wheelbase stock.  If it doesn't work, I always have the option of changing to a switched diamond. My only reservation with doing that at the outset being that my layout is set in the Edwardian period and switched diamonds were not in use at that time. Jim. |
||
|
posted: 13 May 2011 09:54 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Jim Guthrie wrote: If it doesn't work, I always have the option of changing to a switched diamond. My only reservation with doing that at the outset being that my layout is set in the Edwardian period and switched diamonds were not in use at that time.Hi Jim, The NER 1912 standards book includes a detailed drawing (dated 19-Dec-1911) for "Standard Switch K Crossings" in sizes 1:8.1/2 to 1:12 inclusive in 1/2 steps. There is a single centre timber 16" wide. (Book reprint available from NERA -- highly recommended.) regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 13 May 2011 14:34 from: Jim Guthrie
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote: Jim Guthrie wrote:.Martin,If it doesn't work, I always have the option of changing to a switched diamond. My only reservation with doing that at the outset being that my layout is set in the Edwardian period and switched diamonds were not in use at that time.Hi Jim, I remembered about the NER using them from an earlier thread on here but I don't think the Caledonian, which I'm modelling, used them. Jim. |
||
| Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |