A challenge to all Anyrail and layout design wizards

[drduncan]

Dear all,

 

I'm the proud, if slightly exhausted and time pressed, father of 4 (ages 4 to 8)...  As an EM modeller I had tried to keep clear water between no 1 son's desire to play trains by giving him a simple n gauge tailchaser when he was 5 1/2 (and it was mostly successful - his trains and daddy's were clearly different). The others now want to get involved... and there is no way n gauge is going to survive contact with them (and the second hand market is small and not much cheaper than new...).  So OO it must be for the play value.

 

However, as a long standing finescale modeller (EM and Broad Gauge to boot) while I can design and build passable and plausible exhibition layouts, set track and tail chasing is rather a closed book to me - the last time I did anything like that must have been over 35 years ago. So I'm out of my depth and need help.

 

So here is the challenge - can any of you come up with a good tailchaser design that will please 4 children?  At least until they can all solder their own brass kits and build their own track...or play with Daddy's trains properly.

 

Some criteria:

• space 7 ft x 5ft, with the possibility of up to another 2 feet width for up to half the layouts length.  (Imagine a an L on its side, short leg down) 
• If the full space is used then an operating well will be needed (but doesn't have to fit all of the children - there can be 2 operating positions 1 inside and 1 outside the well), or there can be access from top, bottom and right sides (and the top side access will have to come out of the total space but not the others)
• 4 circuits if at all possible (Otherwise there won't be a moment's peace as they will all naturally want to play at the same time)
• Hornby R 415 operating Consett iron ore set (because no 1 son found my childhood one in the attic and is obsessed by it)
• Hornby turntable and some loco stabling
• A station
• Some sidings

 

All suggestions gratefully received.

 

Regards

 

Duncan

[DCB]

4 track main line, station, MPD, Sidings in 7ft X 5ft in OO?  .  You need the bloke who designed Dr Who's Tardis not Anyrail.              Some RTR doesn't like 1st Radius so I would just buy two circles of 2nd Radius and two of 3rd Radius and some straights to form a 2nd/3rd radius oval and a second oval with short straights half way along the short sides outside it.  If you try to fit points between ovals there will be conflict (!)     Half the fun and educational value of model railways is the geometry and learning what you can and can't build with the fixed geometry of set track.  A 7X5 with a central 30" X 54" Hole, 2 kids inside 2 out is my baseline suggestion  that or use the kitchen floor. The kids might find Scalextric more fun.

Edited August 1, 2022 by DCB
1st Radius added

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, DCB said:

4 track main line, station, MPD, Sidings in 7ft X 5ft in OO?  .  You need the bloke who designed Dr Who's Tardis not Anyrail.

I would just buy two circles of 2nd Radius and two of 3rd Radius and some straights to form a 2nd/3rd radius oval and a second oval with short straights half way along the short sides outside it.  If you try to fit points between ovals there will be conflict (!)     Half the fun and educational value of model railways is the geometry and learning what you can and can't build with the fixed geometry of set track.  A 7X5 with a central 30" X 54" Hole, 2 kids inside 2 out is my baseline suggestion  that or use the kitchen floor. The kids might find Scalextric more fun.

Four circuits should be easy enough. Hornby/Peco 4th radius is 572mm, so if you are happy with 1st radius (371mm)for the innermost loop it would fit easily. Even if you went for 2nd radius (438mm) for the inner most loop you could lay flexible track outside the 3rd loop at 67mm spacing with a radius of 639mm/diameter 1278mm. 5ft is 1524mm so, if everything was centralised, you'd have 123mm (nearly 5") to spare. Doing the same at the ends would leave up to 610mm of straight along the long sides.

 

Don't worry about Anyrail - get yourself some Hornby R619 Track Planning Symbols and have a play - almost as much fun as building the layout itself!

 

Usual disclaimer.

[RobinofLoxley]

Probably the lost important thing working with setrack formations is symmetry. Its not too hard to come up with  a couple of basic structures but anything that doesnt comply is going to be hard to build. I had something like this on the floor of my loft for about 20 years.

 

Top and bottom dont have to be a mirror image exactly but where an item appears in one side there should be a corresponding item opposite. Hence the two small R610 items at A, placed to give reasonable separation between the second and third radius loops and the outer loop which is also third radius extended by R600s in diagonal positions which allow any of them to be replaced by a point as bottom left. I have shown sidings but while I think its overkill a turntable can go there too.

 

There is room to insert a fourth loop of radius 1 at B - the mentioned stock would probably run on it but again it seems like overkill.

 

I would wire it open, single controller, except for the sidings to allow, heaven forfend, a second loco to be parked.

[Chimer]

Two double track circuits at different levels?

[Hroth]

Have a look at some of the early Hornby "Engine Shed" blogs.  Their test track appeared to consist of concentric ovals from at least R2* to R4 with linking crossovers. 

 

* There may have been an R1 oval too, though I don't think even Hornby takes that seriously nowadays!

[B McG]

On 31/07/2022 at 16:58, drduncan said:

Dear all,

 

I'm the proud, if slightly exhausted and time pressed, father of 4 (ages 4 to 8)...  As an EM modeller I had tried to keep clear water between no 1 son's desire to play trains by giving him a simple n gauge tailchaser when he was 5 1/2 (and it was mostly successful - his trains and daddy's were clearly different). The others now want to get involved... and there is no way n gauge is going to survive contact with them (and the second hand market is small and not much cheaper than new...).  So OO it must be for the play value.

 

However, as a long standing finescale modeller (EM and Broad Gauge to boot) while I can design and build passable and plausible exhibition layouts, set track and tail chasing is rather a closed book to me - the last time I did anything like that must have been over 35 years ago. So I'm out of my depth and need help.

 

So here is the challenge - can any of you come up with a good tailchaser design that will please 4 children?  At least until they can all solder their own brass kits and build their own track...or play with Daddy's trains properly.

 

Some criteria:

• space 7 ft x 5ft, with the possibility of up to another 2 feet width for up to half the layouts length.  (Imagine a an L on its side, short leg down) 
• If the full space is used then an operating well will be needed (but doesn't have to fit all of the children - there can be 2 operating positions 1 inside and 1 outside the well), or there can be access from top, bottom and right sides (and the top side access will have to come out of the total space but not the others)
• 4 circuits if at all possible (Otherwise there won't be a moment's peace as they will all naturally want to play at the same time)
• Hornby R 415 operating Consett iron ore set (because no 1 son found my childhood one in the attic and is obsessed by it)
• Hornby turntable and some loco stabling
• A station
• Some sidings

 

All suggestions gratefully received.

 

Regards

 

Duncan

Hi Duncan,

 

Challenge accepted and I've had a crack at this.  I've managed to squeeze together a 4 track oval, just!  The operating well is 2.5 feet by 5 feet which is probably somewhat tight for two young ones.   I did manage to get the consett ore set in their at the bottom left corner, again this is a tight squeeze, also the gradient up could make for some interesting running as I think you'll need a 5% incline.  Some of the set geometry, especially with the diamond on the top and the point from the main line into the goods area next to the platform was interesting to say the least.  Suffice to say flex track will be needed in sections, also there won't be enough space for a full width platform at the bottom.

 

Given the constraints I think a three line circuit is more realistic for the space you have. If one of your flock is happy taking turns in shunting you'll have more space and more area to have further sidings and operational interest. Either that or have an independent high level line or two! Just a thought as rule number one applies. 🙂  

 

Hope that helps you, all the best in your endeavors,

 

Cheers

Bryant

[ITG]

As well as track layout, it would be worth considering options for control systems across/between the circuits. Unless I missed it, I don’t think you’ve stated whether DCC or DC. I’m really only experienced in the former, but to me that would be simplest as it would give your offspring flexibility on accessing/controlling/swapping locos, and/or indeed swapping circuits easily. The negative may be it would potentially allow head-on crashes!

Another thought…. If all sidings etc are on the outside (albeit space is limited on the inside) will that cause conflict because of restricted access to same?

[Chimer]

Just for fun .......

 

 

Blue tracks at baseboard level, brown tracks high level, green incline.  All the curves are R2/R3/R4 or the "special curve", with some weird combinations to try to line things up to be joined by straights.  The long east-west straights are just lengths of flexi, but elsewhere I've used the various set-track straight options.  There are some minor discontinuities probably within the limits of set-track "jiggleability".  Significant brotherly cooperation will be required to, e.g., exchange a loco on the outer upper circuit with one from the shed .......

 

Don't know how the "Consett hopper" works but it might be possible to get a low-level siding parallel to a high-level track somewhere - top right maybe?

 

You could have a better goods yard or a better MPD, but only by ditching the other one!

[Shanghai Diver]

Keeping everything on one level, within 7x5 and needing to use R1, 2, 3 and 4 curves (but assuming if anything like my son, there are 0-6-0's or using my old Mainline engines that handle R1 without a problem).  Have provided a station for 3 of four loops but have given the passing loops so there can be some share ability of all stations.  Set track but you might need to trim some straights.

 

There is a right old spaghetti of points and crossings at the tops.  Not sure how little arms reach?  But then have given both he turntable and goods depot in the centre well. Also, I ran out of space to link loop 2 to 3, but perhaps remove one of the diamond crossings?

 

If you want to get further form the edge, lose the R610's and reduce the length of the flex / trimmed tracked on the north-south.

 

Can't say I know how the Hopper works - eBay and Google have only, not been much help, but per @Chimer assume it need a rise.  You could perhaps do something with the most outer station loop and turn that into a rise.  Not convinced.  Old engines get up short, sharp sloes better than new ones but I still think impractical even with the Hornby piers.

 

If you want a well, you could flip the whole plan 180 degrees and then run the TT and goods yard off the bottom in the extra space you have per @B McG.

 

It is quite a squeeze and still can see some disagreements and accidental coming together of engines without some kind of Fat Controller...and no, I have not begun to consider the electrics at this point.

 

 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Shanghai Diver
Added info

[Chimer]

Feedback from the OP would be welcome ..... 🤔

[drduncan]

Dear all, especially @Chimer, @Shanghai Diver and @B McG

 

My apologies for my silence. A combination of too much work and too much family has distracted me from RMWeb. 
 

I must say I’m very impressed-I didn’t think there would be much interest in my challenge especially the quart into a pint pot wish list.

 

All three plans are very good indeed considering the space v wish list problem. The split level approach was one I have been toying with, as well as losing a circuit in order to get the play value from the TT and Ore drop. So there is much food for thought here and I’m extremely grateful to you all.

 

Planning and doodling continues! Next week site clearance will hopefully start and I can if necessary playing er planning on the loft floor at a push…

 

Thanks

 

Duncan