OO to N feasibility study

Hi to all fellow modellers.

I am in a dilemma right now and am seeking advice from the more experienced out there. I am relatively inexperienced having been at this for a couple of years at the most but am learning fast I can tell you, painful as it is . The problem is I am struggling to achieve my objectives with my current layout design without things looking cluttered (my layout is 10'6" x 7' 8" in OO gauge, see my layout thread http://yourmodelrailway.net/view_topic.php?id=11700&forum_id=21 ). 

My objectives are:

* Continuous running so I can just sit and watch when I feel like it.
* Plenty of storage
* Shunting capabilities for when I want to be more interactive (ok, ok, I mean play )
* A good mix of countryside scenery as well as urban and/or industrial scenes


Am I being realistic here? Should I just accept that I need to simplify my layout and accept the space limitations? 


My own thoughts are that given my space limitations 'N' gauge is the way to go here. This would mean selling up all my OO gauge stock and track and starting again. This would be a PITA but if needs be etc…


Please feel free to offer your advice / opinions and p

Paul, to fit into that size with what you want- 00 is too big in my opinion so N scale is the only way.

Paul, I am inexperienced too, and have experienced the exact opposite of what you describe.  I tried to do everything in N. A large shunting yard, a decent length of run, an embankment, large station, etc. You can get a lot in with N, but it started to overwhelm me. I am in the process of switching to small 00 gauge layout, which I feel much happier about at this time.

I do love N, mind you, but ask yourself if you are trying too much??

Mike.

Hi Paul

I did exactly the same as you’re suggesting in the late 1960s, for the same reasons.

Took all my OO stuff including 8 locos, loads of rolling stock and track to Beatties of London, and came back with  1 loco a couple of coaches, a few yards of flexi track and 1 point.

I never really got going again and eventually the interest waned. Still regret it over 40 years later.

My suggestion would be to create lists of pros and cons for each gauge/scale, including how much you would expect to get for your OO stuff and what the N gauge equivalent would cost.

 
Ed

Hi Paul,i model N scale and i'm happy with it.I don't think there's too much difference in price between scales.I don't thinl you'll regret it if you do change.You might get better prices on ebay than part exchange at a shop.If you do decide on a shop Rails of Sheffield buy second hand stock.

Hi Paul,

I think your mad. Unless you specifically want to model in N gauge thenI'd carry on with what you are doing. Your layout looks great and there is plenty of room for more if you want it. Play around more with what you've got. It might mean some compromise but as long as the main elements are there. Everyone could always do with more space but where do you stop.

It's your shout but you've done a great job so far.

Cheers

Toto

Some good input there Paul. :thumbs

Setting out what you actually want is a good starting point.  Sol is right - to get all that list into that space in "OO" is a non-starter.  "Roundy-roundy" main line trains take up a lot of space in "OO".

Financially, it depends on how much you've already invested.  You will lose a load on second hand sales of most things.

"N" is great - provided you can model at that scale.  I couldn't so I'm "stuck" with "OO".

G'day Paul,

You can have a few of those options you have mentioned in what you have already. If the area around the station can be modelled as an urban area, which could include 'urban or town scene' back drops and low relief buildings. The oposite corners could be modelled with a country style landscape, including a viaduct where the lines cross over each other. Also, the yard could be modified to allow some more shunting options.



I know the plan below looks a little more complex, but it would give you some more shunting operations…



I have gone off what you have already in the yard area as in your plan above and pictures of the current layout. Where it reads 'back to main lines' is the line that runs back around to the station side of the layout. One of the 'loco' roads have been removed and the inclusion of headshunts for shunting duties have been included, as well as additional sidings to allow more shunting duties.

So with a few changes, you can still have what you have nominated above, urban areas, industrial (sidings etc), country and continuous running.

Cheers, Gary.

Wow - our in house "layout planning genius" strikes again !!!  Well done Gary - way beyond the call of duty I'd imagine. :thumbs

I'd vote for N gauge I've been doing N for a few months short of 40 years (I'm now 80 and still cope). In the space you have, N would really show one of it's strengths, the ability to run prototypical (or near) length trains in the scenery, and more space for the scenery, in 'orribly 'oversize (00) your layout is nearly all track, not much room for scenery.

Of course a lot depends on what you really wnt from a layout, just to have something to waych trains on, or something to carry out intricate operations and to heck with the appearance, or something which allows  both approaches; have your complex station and goods area for the nitty gritty operatoion and the rest of the layout to just watch the trains on, best of both worlds!

Wow guys I have just logged on and am once again blown away by the degree of help this forum offers a complete novice like myself, cheers to you all… thumbs:thumbs. There is an interesting mix of opinions here which needs careful consideration, and I intend to give them just that. I'm in no hurry here, this is after all my 'rest of life' project! Its all good experience in my book and whats that old saying about mistakes and learning :hmm?? I view my failed attempts as part of the learning process and above all, its all good fun :doublethumb.
Once again Gary you amaze me with your input :thumbs. I will study what you suggest and make a new track plan in SCARM, see how it looks, and post a screenshot when done. 

I am now going to spent some time considering all your comments while having a beer!

Cheers all, Paul… :cheers:cheers:cheers

Paul, I am no expert in matters of layout design, or anything else, for that matter. However, my first thought is, 'why do you need so much track?'  What are you hoping to achieve with four oval tracks that two can't achieve?  Are you really intending to have four trains running at once? Do you really need four platform faces?  Why not two?

Personally, I think that you are possibly making the same mistake as many other newcomers in that you are being over ambitious.  What normally happens is that the newcomer eventually gets disconcerted because, in wanting to model the whole of the railway system, including Clapham Junction, on a 6' x 4' baseboard, in reality they have actually set themselves an impossible task.  You seem to have reached this point.

 My advice, for what it's worth, is to scrap your plan and start again.  Design a much simpler trackplan, or get one from a book, of which there are many available, which suits your basic needs.   You could always alter the basic trackplan in the future if you felt it necessary.

You obviously chose to model in OO for reasons known only to yourself.  Presumably you felt that it would suit your needs.  I see no reason why you should go through the expense of changing gauge when all you need to do is be more realistic about what you can actually fit into the finite space defined by your baseboard.

My fee is in the post!

Terry

That's what I call an instant response! 

 You have probably hit the nail on the head Terry. It has crossed my mind that I am trying to incorporate too much into my layout for the space I have, hence my comment in my original post about accepting the space limitations and simplifying my layout. I am going to spend this weekend thinking about it and playing around in SCARM to see what I can come up with. 


 I decided to model in OO because it's all I knew when I started. It is after all the most common gauge in the UK and its what I had as a kid too. 


 It's all a learning curve and I'm sure I'll look back one day and laugh (or cry) about my past mistakes, and be in the position to offer other newcomers the benefit of my experience…

Cheers, Paul 

[user=1613]Blanman27[/user] wrote:

I am now going to spent some time considering all your comments while having a beer!

Excellent idea :cheers:cheers:cheers


Ed

Well guys I have considered everything and decided to stick with my existing layout and make it work. I read and considered all your comments over and over and decided you all opinions have their merit! 


The thing that swung it for me was Toto's down right bluntness (you were right Toto, I must be mad ) , and Gary's helpful as ever suggestions. I also think Terry was right in what he says about cramming too much in, although I am a little confused by your 'four oval loops' comment Terry. I have just two main lines which split at the platforms into four so I can only run two trains at a time. Unless you mean the double overlapping circuit? I wanted the double circuit to prolong the run, an idea borrowed from Brian Lambert.


Anyway, I have decided that I can create more space for scenery by creating a long tunnel section over the outer track behind the station which will stretch all the way back to the bridge  and exit on the opposite end where the  track rounds the bend left of the station.  I have already built a good portion of this and will get some pic posted soon to show my progress. I am playing around with your shunting suggestions Gary and will be making some changes there too. I may also simplify the station area and reduce it to just two main lines. This would create space for a station building and road scene etc with surrounding buildings.


I am now fired up and looking forward to next weekend when I should get the rest of the tunneled section finished and get some pics taken and posted (on my layout thread).


Onwards and upwards… 


Paul

I'm glad you've decided which way to go Paul.Juat a word of caution regarding your long tunnel,make sure you have access to the track in some way in case of derailments.

Hi Alan.

Yes I plan to make the sections removable for access. This will need careful planning but should be acheivable.

Cheers, Paul

Hi Paul,

I'm glad you took the time to think it through again. I think your overall layout is fantastic. It may just take a bit of tweaking to get what you want from it but I wouldn't go bananas. I can understand the shunting requirement , it's something that most of us want.

Anyway, great, sounds like you are getting your head around it again and it's no bad thing to have doubts. They just make you consider things in more depth.

Hope my bluntness was not bordering rudeness. It certainly wasn't meant?

I'll look forward to seeing how it all progresses.

Cheers

Toto

G'day Paul,

Just a few more ideas for saving space around the station area..

1. The first diagram shows a single platform platform with the passing loops on the outer. This could give you the option of a concouse over the top to reach the platforms and a low relif station building against the backscene. The platform could be accessed by pedestrian subway and stairs coming up to the platform centre. Very urban like.

2. The 2nd is a rearrangement of what you have, but allowing the passing loops in the centre between the platform roads. Again it could be accessed by a concourse over the top, allowing for a narrower no.2 platform with minimal passenger shelter and a main station building on platform 1. It too can be accessed from a pedestrian subway.

3. Only allowing for one loop road through the station, narrowing down the whole station area. It would also make for interesting operation. Again, the platforms can be accessed by concourse or subway. Like option 2, platform 2 could be a lot narrower and platform 1 house the main station building.

1.                                                          2.                                                       3.



Cheers, Gary.

Cheers guys.

 

Toto, my comment about your bluntness was taken in good humor so no worries there… :). I just meant that you got straight to the point which made me think :thumbs.

 

Once again Gary thanks for your input. I will not be doing anything meaningfull until the weekend so have the week to play around in SCARM with your suggestions. I'll get some pics posted as soon as I can…

 

Cheers, Paul