click here for a list of all existing Templot documentation
  Important Privacy Information cookie information pre-print options:    

 click image to open Templot Club in a new tab             Search           remove page highlighting
Templot club top logo
  looking for help ? -- -- --
looking for Templot? - (free)


enjoy using Templot? - 

 you are not logged in  - Login | Join

receive all messages by email: info


Recent Topics
Front Page  Search  Image Gallery  Gallery Upload  My Account  Members  SourceForge  TemplotMEC  Help  
make a donation  
please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors Templot Companion - User Guide
            messages archive on Yahoo
page trail:  Templot Club > Forums > Share and show > comments please on my new OO "final" layout
Templot web site

                 comments please on my new OO "final" layout
     
 Start new topic   Reply blank   Printer friendly 
  Rate this topic  
AuthorMessage
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
1st message | this message only posted: 16 Feb 2020 21:20
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
ikcdab
Taunton, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
All, so here we are. I remember reading many years ago of someone  building  layout called something like “my last great layout” and I marveled at the time about the finality. But now I find myself doing the same thing.
I am to build a new shed, 7.5m x 4.5m in our garden. In this will build my best OO layout yet. In simple terms it is a double track oval with two branches, one double track to a reasonable sized station, the other single track to a simpler one. It will be based on BR(S) practice in the 1960s..ish.
I am not a novice and have been building railway models for many years. In the last few years I have built two end-to-end terminus to fiddle yard layouts. Both used templot and the track was built with SMP for plain line and copper clad soldered bullhead pointwork. I am very happy with both and I have learnt a lot, the second layout is much better technically than the first!
I am not looking for slavish prototype fidelity but I want something that looks good and feels like the real thing.
This jpeg is a general overview.
The attached box file shows where I have got to so far and I would welcome comments on the templot side of things. Please note that I have not really tackled timber shoving yet on this plan. That’s for later.
Turnouts are B8s throughout but with C10s on the two mainline junctions. This feels right to me but I am open to other suggestions.
My real question is around the transition curves. I have tried hard to get a smooth transition between the “straight” sides (though they are not really straight) and the end curves.  But I seem to have ended up with several small templates, particularly on the double track branch. Probably a result of adding turnouts into the line, splitting off approach and exit the changing my mind, back to plain track, back to turnout etc.
Are my transition curves OK? I really want to get a smooth mainline feel. I am happy to start all over again if needed as I want to get it right. I had a lot of trouble getting the oval to close up on its self, so I hope this is OK.
All comments and suggestions gratefully received!
Thanks

__________
message ref: 29042
Attachment: charlton_junction_2020_02_16_1908_59.box (Downloaded 30 times)
 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
2nd message | this message only posted: 17 Feb 2020 18:42
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Phil O
Plymouth, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides
Hi, the first thing that jumps out at me, is that you have to access a siding before you can use the head shunt to access the rest of the yard and it also ties up a platform whilst you do it.

I'm using my tablet, so unable to open up and check the boxfile.

Phil
__________
message ref: 29048

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
3rd message | this message only posted: 18 Feb 2020 00:28
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Andrew Barrowman
USA

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
1 in 50 might be OK but that could depend on a lot of factors. If you have not used 1 in 50 gradients with your stock on a previous layout you might want to run a few experiments, particularly with curved track.
__________
message ref: 29050

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
4th message | this message only posted: 18 Feb 2020 07:51
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
ikcdab
Taunton, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Andrew Barrowman wrote: 1 in 50 might be OK but that could depend on a lot of factors. If you have not used 1 in 50 gradients with your stock on a previous layout you might want to run a few experiments, particularly with curved track.yes thanks. having looked at it, i dont need that much clearance, the 1 in 50s would give 200mm roughly. i can reduce that and have gentler gradients.
__________
message ref: 29051

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
5th message | this message only posted: 18 Feb 2020 15:08
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Phil O
Plymouth, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides
I have taken the liberty of altering your terminus as per my earlier proposal and tidied up your platform roads. I think you can also perform a similar exercise in the fiddleyard as each road appears to be on the same radii.

A further couple of proposals would be to add a crossover to the headshunt road and the adjacent platform road, unless you propose to shunt the yard with the train loco, I would also add a crossover to the branch station, to allow any loco hauled trains to run around.

Cheers

Phil.



__________
message ref: 29053
Attachment: charlton_junction_2020_02_18_1546_53.box (Downloaded 25 times)
 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
6th message | this message only posted: 18 Feb 2020 19:26
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
ikcdab
Taunton, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Phil O wrote: I have taken the liberty of altering your terminus as per my earlier proposal and tidied up your platform roads. I think you can also perform a similar exercise in the fiddleyard as each road appears to be on the same radii.

A further couple of proposals would be to add a crossover to the headshunt road and the adjacent platform road, unless you propose to shunt the yard with the train loco, I would also add a crossover to the branch station, to allow any loco hauled trains to run around.

Cheers

Phil.


Hi Phil, many thanks. But now i have a facing three-way point in the up  main....not sure if thats typical. I think it was frowned on. my current layout is based on Freezers Minories and this new one is a slight enlargement of that. Hence i am avoiding run rounds in the platforms to encourgae mire shunting.Any thoughts on my transition curves in the mainline? Should i use transition whenever i join up templates??

__________
message ref: 29054

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
7th message | this message only posted: 18 Feb 2020 19:51
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Jim Guthrie
United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
ikcdab wrote: Phil O wrote: Hi Phil, many thanks. But now i have a facing three-way point in the up  main....not sure if thats typical. I think it was frowned on. my current layout is based on Freezers Minories and this new one is a slight enlargement of that. Hence i am avoiding run rounds in the platforms to encourgae mire shunting.Any thoughts on my transition curves in the mainline? Should i use transition whenever i join up templates??

I think if you made the turnout a tandem instead of a three way,  that would be acceptable.

Jim.

__________
message ref: 29055

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
8th message | this message only posted: 19 Feb 2020 00:03
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Nigel Brown
 

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Maybe you could tell us a bit more about what you see the layout depicting. Is it post-steam? Mixed steam/electric? Predominantly passenger or mixed passenger/goods? And so on.

The one thing I wonder about is what happens to trains leaving the main terminus. They could end up in the smaller terminus of course. But otherwise, how do they get back to the main terminus? Or do they just end up in the sidings at the bottom?

Just wondering.

Nigel

__________
message ref: 29058

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
9th message | this message only posted: 19 Feb 2020 07:02
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Phil O
Plymouth, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides
Jim Guthrie wrote: ikcdab wrote: Phil O wrote: Hi Phil, many thanks. But now i have a facing three-way point in the up  main....not sure if thats typical. I think it was frowned on. my current layout is based on Freezers Minories and this new one is a slight enlargement of that. Hence i am avoiding run rounds in the platforms to encourgae mire shunting.Any thoughts on my transition curves in the mainline? Should i use transition whenever i join up templates??

I think if you made the turnout a tandem instead of a three way,  that would be acceptable.

Jim.

Hi Jim

It is a tandem!

Phil.



__________
message ref: 29059

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
10th message | this message only posted: 19 Feb 2020 08:47
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
ikcdab
Taunton, United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
Nigel Brown wrote: Maybe you could tell us a bit more about what you see the layout depicting. Is it post-steam? Mixed steam/electric? Predominantly passenger or mixed passenger/goods? And so on.

The one thing I wonder about is what happens to trains leaving the main terminus. They could end up in the smaller terminus of course. But otherwise, how do they get back to the main terminus? Or do they just end up in the sidings at the bottom?

Just wondering.

Nigel
Hi Nigel, well rule one applies as always. It is 1960s with the aim of running green diesels and some steam too. i like freight trains so it will be a mix of both. Im not that much into shunting to its a layout when i can sit back and watch them belt round. The idea is that a train can leave the main terminus, go round the main circuit a few times then at some point either stop in the hidden loops or run to the branch terminus. in the hidden loops it can run round and go back to the main terminus if required. But as i said, rule one applies and i expect that at some point thomas and edward will make an appearance too.
my main interest at the moment is getting nice, smooth flowing track, hence this posting on templot forum. 
I am confused. If i have a piece of curved track and attach another piece with the "shift and join" function, does that give me a proper transition or not?  Or is it best practice to always make a transition link when joining templates?
when the templates are on similar curves then i cannot make a transition anyway, so whats best in these cases?

__________
message ref: 29061

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
11th message | this message only posted: 19 Feb 2020 14:01
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Phil O
Plymouth, United Kingdom



view images in gallery
view images as slides
I have been around your inner oval and all the transitions appear to be OK, so I would continue as you are.

When I want a transition between two curved templates, I will alter the radius of one to be a bit tighter than the other and then make the transition template, which ones get altered depends on the situation at the time.

HTH.

Phil
__________
message ref: 29062

 
 Clicked a link? Wrong message? Wait until the page has finished loading, click in the address bar and then press the Enter key. This is a timing bug in some browsers.
12th message | this message only posted: 19 Feb 2020 16:23
 PM  Reply with quote  Reply blank 
from:
Tony W
North Notts., United Kingdom

 

view images in gallery
view images as slides
ikcdab wrote:I am confused. If i have a piece of curved track and attach another piece with the "shift and join" function, does that give me a proper transition or not?  Or is it best practice to always make a transition link when joining templates?
when the templates are on similar curves then i cannot make a transition anyway, so whats best in these cases?
The  "shift and join" function will always produces perfectly aligned joins between track sections regardless of their radius, no transition curve involved.  The radius changes instantly at the joint. Transition curves between track sections of differing radii are optional and in sidings unlikely to be used. They would be found in running lines and Phil O has already commented on how to produce them.
Regards
Tony.

__________
message ref: 29063

 
This is topic ID = 3613     Page created at 16:07 (local time)  
You can type a quick reply to this topic here.

Click in the box to begin.


But to reply to an individual message, or to include images, attachments and formatted text, use the reply buttons on each message above.

To start a new topic in this forum, click the Start new topic button below.
To start a new topic in a different forum, click the Forum Jump drop-down list below.

             Start new topic 

 click to jump to a different forum:     Back to top of page

Templot Club > Forums > Share and show > comments please on my new OO "final" layout
about Templot Club

list recently active topics Templot Companion - User Guide - A-Z Index Templot Explained for beginners Please click: important information for new members and first-time visitors.
indexing link for search engines

back to top of page


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.

The small print: All material submitted to this web site is the responsibility of the respective contributor. By submitting material to this web site you acknowledge that you accept full responsibility for the material submitted. The owner of this web site is not responsible for any content displayed here other than his own contributions. The owner of this web site may edit, modify or remove any content at any time without giving notice or reason.
Problems with this web site? Contact webmaster@templot.com.   This web site uses cookies: click for information.  
© 2020  

Powered by UltraBB - © 2009 Data 1 Systems