C and O station as it was by CandO

[CandO]

Have just marked out the baseboards into 6" squares I'm now just reassessing the exact placement of the plans before transferring certain aspects to the boards....hopefully this will enable me to get the track placement just right to reflect the actual scenario

Piccies soon!!

p.s. Should I be doing the marking out as part of the Baseboard Construction Forum?? Or is that actual Build only??

[ParkeNd]

A tip to consider or not.

As a beginner I found that Peco points templates (downloaded from Peco website and printed 100% size) got me through. I drew the curves and straights with pencil and popped the cut out templates into position - where they didn't join smoothly I knew I had to get out the rubber and redraw the curves or straights to suit. Then I left the templates pinned in place and only removed them as laid track got to that position - one by one.

Find the templates to suit your track code here:- http://www.peco-uk.com/page.asp?id=pointplans

[CandO]

Cheers ParkeNd, shall have a look at that

In other news I seem to have hit a little snag with the planning stage. In amongst the new material I found the other week were some plans of a couple of the buildings complete with dimensions. Great I thought, should make the builds a little easier BUT.... against my plans the buildings are actually smaller than the plan shows which got me checking my plan scaling (and no they haven't been enlarged/extended any as the map plan and the building schematics date from the same time). This has thrown me a total curve ball as after double checking I then found that my plan was out slightly - it was too small!! So this means that the buildings are even further out against the plans. I'm now scratching my head and trying to make some sense of it all

Who knew this modelling thing could be sooooooooo frustrating!!

[Bufferstop]

Is it as far out as the 7" in 4'-8.5" that your track is out? We almost invariably end up making selective compression to make things fit the space available.

[CandO]

Is it as far out as the 7" in 4'-8.5" that your track is out? We almost invariably end up making selective compression to make things fit the space available.

????? Where did you get those figures from Bufferstop?????

[flying scotsman123]

If you scale OO gauge track up at 1:76 you find it's 7 inches less that 4' 8 1/2" that standard gauge track is, for various historical reasons. P4 and EM gauge use the same scale (1:76) but have more accurate track. Hence the point about not needing to worry about having everything to the exact mm when you're making compromises elsewhere.

In summary, if it's not majorly different and it's a major inconvenience to change, it's probably not worth it and if you thibk it is, you may wish to consider P4 or EM.

[Emettman]

If you scale OO gauge track up at 1:76 you find it's 7 inches less that 4' 8 1/2" that standard gauge track is,

This is 9mm N which at 1:148 is only about 4 inches off, but the principle still applies.

Chris

[CandO]

Ah I see!! I wasn't fully aware of that but thanks

[CandO]

DOH!!!!

After banging my head in frustration against every solid item I could find over my continuing problem with the building scale difference between my map plan and the building plans themselves I've found the problem!! The building next door is shown smaller than its plans but the overall length of BOTH buildings equals the right scale size!! On the map plan one is half the length of the other but in the actual plans it's about two fifths to 3/5

Onwards and upwards now that's all sorted, I've started drawing up actual gauge size plans for the warehouse now I'm more confident with sizes

[CandO]

<Cough cough> Jeez it's a tad dusty in here! A quick sweep through and it's back to basics

Hi folks, I'd like opinions on whether I'm better using ElectroFrog points or Conductive Frog please.....
Also If I use ST-6 turnouts are they electro or conductive ??

Just read through the thread and Emmettman was helpful some time back but his drawing/ picture has gone in the reply he put! I'm trying to sort all the points out I need - I'm using N gauge - and I'm no nearer in my understanding! Would I be right in thinking you need electrofrog points if you intend running trains in both directions on the same length of track (obviously not at the same time!)

My layout is an oval twin track with a six or eight line fiddle yard to the rear and a six line coal yard where one line is accessible from both ends and five are sidings (See below)

The attachment layout bottom2.jpg is no longer available

(Third line at right will join to middle to make two tracks in and out of fiddle yard)

SO to recap with diagram above - 1)Bottom two lines are main line with platforms so they'll be CW and CCW
2) Third line up is a spur/siding that needs to be operational to trains arriving from both directions (points on left hand of main track to be replicated on right but on the curves if that's feasible!)
3) Five sidings in Coal Yard

Any help greatly appreciated.....shall just go and have another play about and study in the hope I get that Eureka moment

[PinkNosedPenguin]

I'll try to help with some of your confusion
Frogs come in two basic types: conducting and insulated. Electrofrog is a Peco trade name for conducting, so "ElectroFrog points or Conductive Frog" mean the same thing!
ST-6 is a Peco set-track point with insulated frog (you can see the black plastic insulator in pictures of it).
No, you do NOT need electrofrog points if you intend running trains in both directions on the same length of track!
The implications of electrofrog points are that you wire the track differently and need to fit insulated rail joiners to the rails emerging from the frog to prevent a short circuit. But, as you do not have the black insulated section, there is much less chance of a train losing contact with the rails and stalling on the point. For this reason (particularly in N gauge where the locos are so small and light) electrofrog points are much preferable. Have a look at the Peco 'code 55' track range of electrofrog points and flexible track. You also need to decide whether you will run DCC or DC - as this can affect the way you wire your track.

Suggested reading for wiring up your layout - http://www.brian-lambert.co.uk/Electrical.html

[CandO]

Thanks PnP - I'll run through that when I get a few more minutes....
I'm running DCC, I purchased the Graham Farrish Countryside Coal set as my train starter pack so I would be working to a set type

[CandO]

After reading PnP's post above I had a play about and came up with the following plans for the Fiddle Yard layout. The below diagram has Peco 55 at the top and Peco 80 settrack at the bottom.....Although PnP advocated the use of Peco 55 I like the look of the settrack more....AAAAARRRRGGGH!! Does anyone know if there is any way of getting a similar layout to the Settrack in Peco 55? Or am I wanting the impossible??

points.JPG (30.86 KiB) Viewed 1691 times

PS alignment is not quite square so try and ignore that bit

[PinkNosedPenguin]

I like the look of the settrack more....AAAAARRRRGGGH!!

I think you're in the minority there . Code 55 points come in 3 sizes with the largest being more realistic but obviously taking up more space; so you have a choice for what suits you best. In your fiddle yard realism is not an issue so you can use whatever you like there - including settrack points if you wish. They will give you slightly longer sidings, but as they are insulfrog you run the risk of locos stalling on them. Also be aware to take care joining code 55 and code 80 as there will be a slight difference in height, though I know some people have done it successfully. Personally I went for code 55 throughout and have not regretted that decision .

[Emettman]

Can't find my previous drawing, but here is in diagram in setrack (not accurate size, don't necessarily use setrack) what you need behind the scenes to get trains in and out of the goods yard in both directions


Bringing the access to the goods yard round onto the curve would need three curved points: I'm pretty sure it would take more space, depending on what radius you have on the innermost of the three-track curve.

Chris