Hi all,

I'm slowly making some progress with a new O Gauge layout, its only small but revolves around building a 3-way point.  Could someone review the attached design and suggest how I can convert the two point templates into the one so I can print and build it.






Any comments/advice/suggestion would be welcomed.




Richie



__________
message ref: 22682

Have you had a look at the tandem turnout video? It's a bit antiquated, but still works, although the terminology has changed in a few cases, it's easy enough to work out what's what. There are slightly easier ways to create the extra common crossing, but I never worry about it when I need to create a tandem turnout.

No doubt Martin will be a long shortly to sort out my short comings.

Phil.
__________
message ref: 22683

Hi Phil,
Thanks for that - I thought there was something, but couldn't find it. Can you point me in the right direction?

Richie
__________
message ref: 22684

Phil O wrote: Have you had a look at the tandem turnout video? It's a bit antiquated, but still works, although the terminology has changed in a few cases, it's easy enough to work out what's what. There are slightly easier ways to create the extra common crossing, but I never worry about it when I need to create a tandem turnout.



No doubt Martin will be a long shortly to sort out my short comings.



Phil.
Hi Phil,
I've had a look around for the video but cannot find it. I have found some instructions from Martin over tandem turnouts, but struggled to follow those.  I've realigned the three-way a bit which I think works better and is buildable. Just not sure on the placement of the 'vee' on the bottom road.

__________
message ref: 22685

Hi Richie,

See this recent topic for links:
 
 http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=3098&forum_id=1

Sorry I don't have time today for a detailed reply.

regards,

Martin.

__________
message ref: 22686

Hello Richie

You don't convert the multiple templates into one as such. For printing, if you select each relevant partial template (it turns white) then press G, it turns red. Do that until you have all the templates you want and then go to OUTPUT at the top and select PRINT GROUP TEMPLATES ONLY.

If the page origin is too far from your templates you might have to accept/skip some blank pages until it gets to your template (it's self explanatory when you see it). Or alternatively there's an option to reset the page origin (the 0,0 co-ordinates- the little green blob) which you can put near your template.

Sorry I can't look at your box file as Templot isn't on the works laptop, but it *appears* that you have placed the two turnouts very close together- are you sure there are no clashes or did you intend to design a three-way (three-throw)?
__________
message ref: 22688

Hi Martin,
Thanks for the reply - I'll have a look at that. I did do a search around but couldn't find much that made sense!

Derek - thanks for your comment. I'll have a try at that. Yes I've used two turnout templates, but the aim is to create a three-way point. Limitations on space and board size mean its the only way I can do it unfortunately.

Richie
__________
message ref: 22690

Hi Richie.
Having had a look at what you are trying to do there are a number of comments I would make.
Firstly, you should try to keep all you templates in the positive quadrant the trackpad as this the only area that Templot will happily print from.
Secondly attempting to use the same type of turnout for both roads of a Tandem the same hand is making life very difficult for yourself. The resulting third crossing will have a very flat angle and means the roads diverge very slowly. Not what you want al all in your situation.
See attached box file for an example.
Regards.
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22693

Changing the crossing angle of the first turnout can make a significant difference. In this case I have changed it from 1 in 7 to 1 in 6.5 with the result that the third crossing has changed from 1 in 20 to 1 in 12, still long but a significant improvement. Tandem Turnouts are challenging as there are limited combinations that will work. The standard modellers combination is generally B-6 + B-8. I have also moved the switches of the two starting Turnouts further apart to allow for full blade opening. If you wish I can do the rest of the design for you or you can pay around with it yourself. Its up to you.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22694

Tony W wrote: Changing the crossing angle of the first turnout can make a significant difference. In this case I have changed it from 1 in 7 to 1 in 6.5 with the result that the third crossing has changed from 1 in 20 to 1 in 12, still long but a significant improvement. Tandem Turnouts are challenging as there are limited combinations that will work. The standard modellers combination is generally B-6 + B-8. I have also moved the switches of the two starting Turnouts further apart to allow for full blade opening. If you wish I can do the rest of the design for you or you can pay around with it yourself. Its up to you.
Regards
Tony.

Hi Tony,
Thank you for your help and assistance with that, really is appreciated.  Im limited on length as you may have gathered, and i was hoping to get enough space to stable two 'Halls' or equivalent length locomotive on each road, but im going to be struggling i think!  Still the basic idea works which is the main thing. I've tweaked the rest of the design now, including the single track lead off the scenic boards onto the sector plate, so i think its now in a position where i can print it and start track laying.

Many thanks again for your help with the 3-way.  Im now wondering if it should have been a left/centre/right three-way slightly curved, rather than a centre/right/right, because of that slight 'kink' in the two shed roads? 

Rich

__________
message ref: 22697

Hi Richie.
Yes, you have got a pair of rather nasty reverse curves there and a semi symmetric arrangement may be better. In any case I have tidied up the timbering of the present arrangement as it is far preferable to do this on screen that trying to do it during construction. If you wish to try a different arrangement then best to try it now rather than later. I could sort out the rails too but that involves a bit more work and may not be needed. Anyway, over to you.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22710

Tony W wrote: Hi Richie.
Yes, you have got a pair of rather nasty reverse curves there and a semi symmetric arrangement may be better. In any case I have tidied up the timbering of the present arrangement as it is far preferable to do this on screen that trying to do it during construction. If you wish to try a different arrangement then best to try it now rather than later. I could sort out the rails too but that involves a bit more work and may not be needed. Anyway, over to you.
Regards
Tony.
Hi Tony,Yes I think your right about the symmetrical arrangement. Those reverse curves don’t look right at all. If you want to have a play, please feel free (with my very grateful thanks) but I’ll have a go tomorrow taking your previous advice, and post what I come up with.

Richie

__________
message ref: 22711

Hi Richie.
I have had another look at your track plan and replaced the Tandem with a more symmetric arrangement. I think it looks much better. The problem I have is not knowing what you are planing stage left.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22730

Hi Richie.
Attached is the tidied up version. I have also tried to optimise the siding length for the shed roads.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22734

Hi Tony,
Thank you ever so much for you help and work on this. Life has got in the way the past couple of days and I'm replying from work as I type, so will have a look on the PC laptop at home tomorrow!

This is just going to be a small shed layout, somewhere to run and photograph locos really. Its two boards, both 3' by 18", with a sector plate to the right, and a traverser to the left, so nothing complicated!

Seriously, many, many thanks - I'm eager to get home and have a look now!

Cheers
Richie
__________
message ref: 22737

Hi Tony,
Thanks for doing that, just had a quick look and while I agree it looks better, unfortunately being straight doesn’t work for the baseboards. I’ll probably not get time now until the weekend to have a proper go at amending it slightly.

The baseboards I’m using I’d originally built for another project, and have an 18” High backscene across the back and on both ends. The left hand end has a cut out for two lines, while the right hand has a cut out for one. The net result is that both lines on the left need to start next to each other in order to access the traverser.

Richie
__________
message ref: 22742

Hi Richie.
I feared that something similar maybe the case, hence my stage left comment. It is possible to move the Tandem as a group, but the two tracks must remain parallel at the traverser edge. You are therefore very restricted by your existing baseboards. Trying to curve the Tandem would only reproduce what you started with. I think for the moment I will let you have another play and see what you can devise or we could just wind up duplicating effort.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22744

Hi Richie.
I assume from the silence that you have not made much progress with this.
I had an idea which you may find a bit off the wall but may be a solution using gaunt turnouts. This  shortens the tandem by removing the switches. What you lose on the tandem you gain on the shed roads. If you can get the traverser to line up with three tracks rather than one it may do. You will however have to arrange separate switching for the crossing polarities.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 22777

Hi Tony,
Sorry for the silence - life really is too chaotic. Im thinking employers should allow time off for hobbies and relaxation! Oh sorry, thats what your suppose to do after work but don't get round to isn't it!!!

Thanks for that, and for putting the time into it for me. I'll take a look.

I did have a play one evening the end of last week and hit the same conclusion that you suggested. That a tandem or three-way of any kind hits the same problem, so have been rethinking the scenario a bit. I can't see any point (excuse the pun!) in producing something where the track will look wrong. Hope to be able to come back with an answer soon, but this week is looking as bad as last week - If I carry on like this it will soon be Christmas!

Richie
__________
message ref: 22786

Hi Tony,
Managed to have a play with a few things now, and I'm slowly realising that six foot is just too short to get the point work in, when dealing with O Gauge. It can be done, but not in a way that looks prototypical, or more importantly right to the eye!

Im back to the drawing board on this one, but many thanks for your help, support and time, really has been appreciated. As this is just a small layout for running locos and doing a few photos, I'm thinking I really need to go back to the original photo plank idea I started with!

Richie
__________
message ref: 22855