[user=434]John Dew[/user] wrote:

Hi Tony

There is something odd with YMR today……I am having serious connection problems but only this site:shock:

Anyway I have briefly achieved success with the iPad

Super job with the surgery on the station:thumbs to quote Morecambe and Wise you won't be able to see the join.

I do believe the layout modifications you have made will make operating far more efficient and pleasurable.

I agree with Marty about the TT roads. You could actually get by with just an entry road and an exit. The current topmost road could be a conventional stabling siding for tank engines……..coal and water facilities would be shared with the TT Entry road for tender locos.

Short stubs off the TT will be great for stabling tender locos and very prototypical for a termini such as yours…….it would be unusual to have a shed so close to a city centre termini in real life. Please don't quote Granby at me:oops::oops: I am busy trying to create the illusion station and shed are separated by quite a distance:roll:

Some questions I should have asked ages ago ……I don't see the answers in prior posts

1 Code 100 or 75. ?

2 DC or DCC

3 How will the turnouts be operated?

Kind Regards

John

Hi John.

The only problem I was having is when I upload a photo it seems to go ok but then I have to go into my gallery to find the photo to upload in my post.In the past it would automatically ask me which photo I wished to include in the post.

The cutting of the station went pretty well with no serious damage.
I'm trying to match the brick paper right now.
Downloaded Scalescenes red brick paper & am changing the colour to try & get it as near as possible to the original.

(1) Track is code 100 as I has quite a bit in stock.

(2) DCC through an NCE Power Pro 5 amp system. I have it split up in sections with each section run through a Circuit Breaker so if one section goes down the rest will continue working.

(3) Turnouts will be operated by Tortoise motors with power from a separate DCC accessory bus run through a circuit breaker from the NCE system. Frog polarity is changed through one of the spare switches on the Tortoise. The Tortoise motors will be run through NCE Switch it's which means I can switch the points through the hand set as well as momentary switches on a panel.

Regards.
Tony.

Thanks, John.

Correct on both counts. 

:doublethumb. 10/10 for the answers

I am glad you're using DCC for turnout control……..it's a big complex layout……I suspect in time you will want to think about some form of route setting matrix otherwise handling the terminus throat will be quite a chore……



A couple of caveats for you to think about


I avoid insulfrog turnouts in any critical area…..I used up my old stock in sleepy sidings……..it looks as though you are using electro frog ?

How do you find the insulfrog crossings?

Double slips……..code 100 only come with insulfrog………I have three of them in a ladder, not unlike your proposed configuration ………….they are not impossible but can create problems with 0-6-0 tanks. If I had my time over again I would use code 75 electro frog. double slips with 100/75 transition connectors……….if nothing  else it might be worth testing a transition……..unless of course you already have the code. 100 double slips?

Secondly and more importantly I would review the station throat to see if there is anyway that you can avoid using the code 100 three way point…… Not sure if the code 75 is any better. I have two code 100 3 ways on Granby and they area total pain and a source of far too many derailments.
Reading the various forums other people se to have. The same problem…..I would not use them again…..indeed from time to time I still contemplate ripping them out
:twisted::twisted:

I should have spotted the 3 way sooner…..my apologies

I can't offer any advice, as you all know far more about it than me, but I do have a question.

If there is a dedicated station pilot, would there be a crossover at the ends of platforms 2 an 3 forming a passing loop, which effectively shortens the useful length of the platforms?


Ed

[user=1338]Ed[/user] wrote:

I can't offer any advice, as you all know far more about it than me, but I do have a question.

If there is a dedicated station pilot, would there be a crossover at the ends of platforms 2 an 3 forming a passing loop, which effectively shortens the useful length of the platforms?


Ed

Hi Ed.

I can't answer that but maybe someone else can.
I plead rule no 1 here ;-)

Regards.
Tony.

[user=434]John Dew[/user] wrote:

:doublethumb. 10/10 for the answers

I am glad you're using DCC for turnout control……..it's a big complex layout……I suspect in time you will want to think about some form of route setting matrix otherwise handling the terminus throat will be quite a chore……



A couple of caveats for you to think about


I avoid insulfrog turnouts in any critical area…..I used up my old stock in sleepy sidings……..it looks as though you are using electro frog ?

How do you find the insulfrog crossings?

Double slips……..code 100 only come with insulfrog………I have three of them in a ladder, not unlike your proposed configuration ………….they are not impossible but can create problems with 0-6-0 tanks. If I had my time over again I would use code 75 electro frog. double slips with 100/75 transition connectors……….if nothing  else it might be worth testing a transition……..unless of course you already have the code. 100 double slips?

Secondly and more importantly I would review the station throat to see if there is anyway that you can avoid using the code 100 three way point…… Not sure if the code 75 is any better. I have two code 100 3 ways on Granby and they area total pain and a source of far too many derailments.
Reading the various forums other people se to have. The same problem…..I would not use them again…..indeed from time to time I still contemplate ripping them out
:twisted::twisted:

I should have spotted the 3 way sooner…..my apologies

10 / 10 I like that :Happy

With the NCE DCC system you can use macros so it would be possible to change points in a certain sequence by attaching them to a particular macro. With a couple of button pushes you can set a series of points to change one after the other & so setting the route for your train.
On my present layout some of the points are still the Peco & Seep types & are controlled from local control panels. I find this very convenient as I walk around with the NCE wireless handset.

On the left hand end I have a double junction. When I built the rest of the layout I used insulfrog crossings.
A nightmare with DCC so I got rid of them & used code 75 electro frog crossings instead.
Strangely I find the insulfrog double slips ok. I have a couple of them on the layout & they're fine. Now they are on the mainline so maybe stock going over them is fast enough not to notice any problem.
Now for the terminus I already have all the track except for one double slip which I can get in electro frog.

I didn't know about those three way point problems.
I don't have any on the present layout but there are three on the proposed terminus layout. To eliminate them would mean more point work & reducing available platform & siding length.
How are they affecting your stock to cause the derailments ?
It is of paramount importance that any point work is dead level as any hump or dip can cause problems.
It is also very important that the back to back measurements of the wheel sets are exactly right.

I allow only metal wheel sets on my layout as I found the plastic ones cause constant dirt on the track & are problematic on point work.

Cheers.
Tony.

Hi Tony,

Are you planning steam, diesel or modern era DMUs? Cyril Freezer was firmly fixed on steam in his plans, hence run arounds, etc. DMUs need none of this.

Life and planning would be a lot easier, and operations more interesting, if the station had two platforms, the inner ones for mainline trains, one outer for local trains, one outer for goods and parcels. That would then give a bit more real estate for the carriage and goods sidings. You could then have the turntable next to the station and the shed and goods further down the peninsula.

The issue with many of these plans is that they have everything. Mainline steam in the Big Four days was highly inefficient. Not only were engines turned, the carriages were sent to the carriage sidings for a clean and wash, especially for the named trains. Having a run around was fine for the local trains, which got a perfunctory sweep through (if that). Mainline station termini normally had the engine shed and coalng facility up to five or six miles away.

Marylebone station in the 1940's is close to the CF plan, but with the turntable next to the station. It might be worth having a look at a two-plarform station with run around and a turntable. Paddington had a turning and watering facility (Ranleigh Road?) just up from the station. 

Nigel 

[user=710]amdaley[/user] wrote:

10 / 10 I like that :Happy

With the NCE DCC system you can use macros so it would be possible to change points in a certain sequence by attaching them to a particular macro. With a couple of button pushes you can set a series of points to change one after the other & so setting the route for your train.

So thats sorted then:thumbs

On my present layout some of the points are still the Peco & Seep types & are controlled from local control panels. I find this very convenient as I walk around with the NCE wireless handset.

If you ever want to convert these to DCC control……DCC Concepts do a decoder for solenoid motors that also switches polarity……I have been progressively changing mine as the peco micro switches fail

On the left hand end I have a double junction. When I built the rest of the layout I used insulfrog crossings.
A nightmare with DCC so I got rid of them & used code 75 electro frog crossings instead.
Strangely I find the insulfrog double slips ok. I have a couple of them on the layout & they're fine. Now they are on the mainline so maybe stock going over them is fast enough not to notice any problem.
Now for the terminus I already have all the track except for one double slip which I can get in electro frog.

So thats sorted as well:thumbs

How are they affecting your stock to cause the derailments ?

Typically with the front bogies of 2-6-0s and 4-6-0s or the tender when reversing in. Both are in TT areas.

It is of paramount importance that any point work is dead level as any hump or dip can cause problems.

:oops:  I know this all too well unfortunately:oops:

It is also very important that the back to back measurements of the wheel sets are exactly right.

Agreed……the back to back gauge I bought was one of my best investments

I allow only metal wheel sets on my layout as I found the plastic ones cause constant dirt on the track & are problematic on point work.

Same on Granby

I didn't know about those three way point problems.
I don't have any on the present layout but there are three on the  proposed terminus layout. To eliminate them would mean more point work  & reducing available platform & siding length.

Some of my problems no doubt stem from poor track laying:oops: Even so if there were any compromises possible that would eliminate one or more I would go for it.




Cheers.
Tony.

:cheers

Sorry about the bold……I am not shouting ….honest!

John

[user=1632]BCDR[/user] wrote:

Hi Tony,

Are you planning steam, diesel or modern era DMUs? Cyril Freezer was firmly fixed on steam in his plans, hence run arounds, etc. DMUs need none of this.

Life and planning would be a lot easier, and operations more interesting, if the station had two platforms, the inner ones for mainline trains, one outer for local trains, one outer for goods and parcels. That would then give a bit more real estate for the carriage and goods sidings. You could then have the turntable next to the station and the shed and goods further down the peninsula.

The issue with many of these plans is that they have everything. Mainline steam in the Big Four days was highly inefficient. Not only were engines turned, the carriages were sent to the carriage sidings for a clean and wash, especially for the named trains. Having a run around was fine for the local trains, which got a perfunctory sweep through (if that). Mainline station termini normally had the engine shed and coalng facility up to five or six miles away.

Marylebone station in the 1940's is close to the CF plan, but with the turntable next to the station. It might be worth having a look at a two-plarform station with run around and a turntable. Paddington had a turning and watering facility (Ranleigh Road?) just up from the station. 

Nigel

Hi Nigel.

The last plan I posted was based on Peter Denny's "Buckingham Central".
It has been revised to base it around Peco track instead of the hand built that Peter Denny had & with John Dew's help it has been refined into something workable.
What I will be running is largely steam with early Dmu's.
Of course rule 1 also makes an appearance in that you may also see Brighton Belle's & Midland Pullmans. However nothing more modern than that will ever make an appearance.
What I want most of all is to be able to enjoy the layout.
After all life's too short :cheers

Cheers.
Tony.

[user=434]John Dew[/user] wrote:

[user=710]amdaley[/user] wrote:

10 / 10 I like that :Happy

With the NCE DCC system you can use macros so it would be possible to change points in a certain sequence by attaching them to a particular macro. With a couple of button pushes you can set a series of points to change one after the other & so setting the route for your train.

So thats sorted then:thumbs

On my present layout some of the points are still the Peco & Seep types & are controlled from local control panels. I find this very convenient as I walk around with the NCE wireless handset.

If you ever want to convert these to DCC control……DCC Concepts do a decoder for solenoid motors that also switches polarity……I have been progressively changing mine as the peco micro switches fail

On the left hand end I have a double junction. When I built the rest of the layout I used insulfrog crossings.
A nightmare with DCC so I got rid of them & used code 75 electro frog crossings instead.
Strangely I find the insulfrog double slips ok. I have a couple of them on the layout & they're fine. Now they are on the mainline so maybe stock going over them is fast enough not to notice any problem.
Now for the terminus I already have all the track except for one double slip which I can get in electro frog.

So thats sorted as well:thumbs

How are they affecting your stock to cause the derailments ?

Typically with the front bogies of 2-6-0s and 4-6-0s or the tender when reversing in. Both are in TT areas.

It is of paramount importance that any point work is dead level as any hump or dip can cause problems.

:oops:  I know this all too well unfortunately:oops:

It is also very important that the back to back measurements of the wheel sets are exactly right.

Agreed……the back to back gauge I bought was one of my best investments

I allow only metal wheel sets on my layout as I found the plastic ones cause constant dirt on the track & are problematic on point work.

Same on Granby

I didn't know about those three way point problems.
I don't have any on the present layout but there are three on the  proposed terminus layout. To eliminate them would mean more point work  & reducing available platform & siding length.

Some of my problems no doubt stem from poor track laying:oops: Even so if there were any compromises possible that would eliminate one or more I would go for it.




Cheers.
Tony.

:cheers

Sorry about the bold……I am not shouting ….honest!

John

Hi John.

Of course you're not shouting :)

We seemed to have most things settled then.

I have been fortunate in that only one Seep motor has given trouble in that the switch was failing to change the frog polarity reliably. It was in an awkward position under the double junction which was difficult to get at. I found when I loosened the screws holding the motor under the point that it worked ok :???:
If any of the point motors start giving trouble on a regular basis then I will replace the offending motor with a Tortoise motor & integrate it into the DCC system like the other Tortoise motors I use.

I will have another look at the layout of the terminus plan when I lay it down on the baseboard & get some track set out. I'm sure there will be places where I will have to refine it & make changes. It all looks well on paper but that may not transfer to the baseboard in the same way.

My next job is to sort out the station building ends & platform face. I will be examining your Scalescene building threads again & deciding what kit I need to download to complete my station.

Cheers.
Tony.

Hi Tony,

I was pretty close with the suggestion re 2 platforms then. Haven't looked at Buckingham for a while, Rev. Denny got it right, no run arounds and the carriage sidings down the line. Can you find room for that rotating 6-road fiddle yard?

Nigel

[user=1632]BCDR[/user] wrote:

Hi Tony,

I was pretty close with the suggestion re 2 platforms then. Haven't looked at Buckingham for a while, Rev. Denny got it right, no run arounds and the carriage sidings down the line. Can you find room for that rotating 6-road fiddle yard?

Nigel

Hi Nigel.

This is the rest of the layout which has already been built.



Cheers.
Tony.

Well I managed to put ends on the station building today.
At least it doesn't look like a bomb site now which it did after I cut off the two end sections of the old building. I still have to do the platform side of the building but I will wait to see how I'll site it before doing that.





Next job is to take all the items off the baseboard & start laying out the terminus plan to see how it looks.

Cheers.
Tony.

That is one fine looking building, Tony.  :thumbs

Very tidy and well matched alterations. Bravo.

Marty

An excellent build. You've obviously done that before. Very well finished. I wish I could get nice crisp results like that.  :thumbs

What's next ?;-)

Cheers

Toto

Thanks for the kind words guys.
I use Scalescenes brick paper but the hardest part was probably getting the brick colour to match.
I had about 10 sheets of brickpaper before I got it near to what was on the building. I don't know how old the building is but I guess it had faded with time.
All the trim is painted card or plastic card.
The project took about four hours in total with a break in between for dinner.
I wont do the platform side until the building is sited.
First I need to clear off the baseboard & lay out the terminus track plan.

To put a track plan down on a baseboard I normally just take the measurements from the small A4 sized plan & scale them up to the baseboard size.
Is there an easier way or what do other people do ?

I
I did the plan with SCARM software
http://www.scarm.info/index.php

Cheers.
Tony.

If you select View - Scale in SCARM and select  1 to 1 (for print), you can print the plan full size on multiple sheets of A4, Tony.

Does use rather a lot of paper though and I can't remember exactly how to navigate around with the keyboard, but it's in the Help.



Ed

[user=1338]Ed[/user] wrote:

If you select View - Scale in SCARM and select  1 to 1 (for print), you can print the plan full size on multiple sheets of A4, Tony.

Does use rather a lot of paper though and I can't remember exactly how to navigate around with the keyboard, but it's in the Help.



Ed

Hi Ed.

Thanks for that.
I'm just reading about it now.

Regards.
Tony.

Great job on finishing the sides of the station Tony:thumbs

I think you will find that the best Scalescene kit to finish the platform side of the building is the large station…….the one with a tower…….I know you dont need that but it has a variety of frontages with different combinations of windows/doors and arches that can be mixed and matched.

I guess you will eventually have to come off the fence regarding Time period/Operating Company at least as far as the station is concerned. Signage and travel posters are going to be a definite time stamp

:pedal

:cheers     John