Im not sure if this will help any newbie. Im sure many older sages will be nodding and thinking 'Yeah, been there, done that' etc!
Tools: Im hopeless at sawing and I knew to build good, square baseboards, Id need to buy some tools to achieve this. They always come in handy for other projects anyway. I already had some basic tools but bought a Metabo mitre saw and a circular saw to make the task easier. Yes, you can get your wood merchant to cut it for you but there's always something the wrong size or improvisation needed later. A cordless drill \ screwdriver will save manually fastening all those screws in the wood frames while a metre long spirit level helps get everything plum. Safety glasses, ear protectors and work gloves might be scoffed at but why take the risk without them?
Ive already used both saws on other projects and number 1 son has as well so the investment was worth it for me.
Building the baseboard frames: was a lot quicker and easier with a few tools. You dont have to be an expert (Im not) but if you can measure twice and cut accurately once, you should be good to go. I planned to build in sections so the layout could be dismantled at a future date if required. Access to the middle of the layout was required as we're both getting on and a 'duck under' wasnt suitable. Having watched a few YT vids, I decided a lift up section was needed. OK, the first effort was botched so had to dismantle, rescue what I could and have another go. Im pretty certain this effort ticks the boxes. The point is, you may be fit enough to duck under your layout now but, what about is 5+ years?
Baseboard frames were made from smooth planed 3 x 1 timber in 4.8m lengths and 12mm thick exterior grade plywood 8 x 4 sheets. Most of the plywood was pre cut by the woodshop and I asked for all sizable offcuts to all be delivered with the rest.
The afore mentioned mitre saw made short work of cutting the timber to suitable lengths for the frames while the circular saw made trimming the plywood offcuts, simple. The frames were glued with woodworking glue \ PVA and suitably sized screws.
If you're building in a garage like me, the floor may have a built in drop from one end to the other or be uneven. Unless you're an ace carpenter, dont even try to cut your baseboard legs with pin point accuracy. Instead, get some adjustable feet from Amazon or EBay. There are various types and easy to fit. These will make getting your baseboard spot on level easily as they can each be adjusted so each leg is the required height.
Layout planning: Might be overlooked in the haste to get started but you'll regret it if you do not plan ahead and, be prepared to make changes as you go on. Do not forget the position of any crossbeams when planning baseboards and track layout. You dont want to find a point or slip is positioned such that you cannot then fit the point motor or route any frog wire. The far right baseboard was already in situ before planning the layout and unfortunately, Ive had to position a couple of points that stradle crossbeams. Cannot be helped and I didnt want to build a complete new board just because of this.
Decide how much scenic detail you want pretty early on in the design process. If you want big embankments, you'll have to reduce the actual track design. I kind of forgot about this and realised too late I didnt really have a lot of space to build any big embankments. Hmmm!
The location of your layout will have an impact of how big it will eventually be and the scale you use. Im fortunate to half half of an integral double garage. OO scale, no problem, I thought! Only it is surprising how much space an OO scale layout can take up and still not look much, especially if you want no curve to be less than 3rd radius imho.
I could have gone N scale and build a layout with a lot more going on but stock size and eyesight would have made it too much of a challenge. Hornby TT wasnt available and Im still not convinced it will be a success kind of making OO the default choice.
I purchased AnyRail to help with the track planning and baseboard design. What a godsend it turned out to be. I had intended to build something along the lines of Topley Dale but with a larger station. One reason or another, I just couldnt get it to work although some parts made it into the 'final' design. In all, I must have gone through 25 - 30 iterations of design before I had something I was starting to feel happy with. Imagine doing that on paper and I have still done a few tweeks.
With Anyrail, you can select from a library of different track manufacturers, scales etc, set parameters such as your minimum curve radius and easements into them and let the software calculate smooth inclines \ declines if you want these on your layout.
Once I was happy with the design, I set the print parameters in AnyRail to track centre line only and 1:1 scale. Turning on page numbering allowed me to identify those pages I only wanted to print saving ink, paper and blank pages. I only printed out points and slips positions, curves and corner sections and figured relatively straight lines could join the resultant gaps. The track centre lines were transferred to the boards by sticking down the printed pages then using a clothes pattern pin wheel. After that, I went over the pin wheel marks with a marker pen so I coulld see where to lay and glue the track bed down.
DCC or DC?: No contest for me. Not wishing to offend anyone but DC is old technology. There's probably little difference in how complicated or ease of installation each is compared to the other but, it just seems a slam dunk to me to go DCC with all the features it gives to locos, track and accessories. The temptation may be to start with DC then convert to DCC later. IMHO, that will just cost more in the long run and will eventually be an obstacle to actually making the conversion.
A word of caution, if using DCC and you want ABC braking sections, slowing sections and auto reversers etc, it's better to plan these in during the planning \ build stage. Having to make wiring changes to accommodate these features on a fully built layout might not be for the faint hearted.
Track: Code 75 or 100, flat bottomed or bullhead, wood or concrete sleepers?[/b] Apart from which track code you'll use, perhaps the era you intend to model may have a big impact on deciding the other options. If you want to model Era 11 then concrete sleepers would be your choice. Heritage or a time before concrete sleepers were common, you probably will go wood. Similarly, the choice of flat bottomed or bullhead. If you want to go bullhead, this means Code 75 in OO scale will be the only(?) choice. Similarly, if you want to use Peco's Unifrog points, these are currently only available in Code 75 bullhead.
Im not particularly bothered about Eras and will likely run a cross heritage \ 1960s to late 1990s period stock, basically anything I like!
I wanted to use Unifrog as they save all the mucking around with electrofrog and look far better imho. This tipped me towards using Code 75 bullhead which turns out is quite an expensive choice! I could have used Code 75 FB but decided for looks to be consistent and use bullhead.
What I will say is Code 75's lower height than Code 100 means you have to be very precise and careful soldering droppers even if soldering to the underside of the track. As for rail joiners, what a PITA they are! Peco SL114 rail joiners for bullhead are tiny but do go on the rail with minimal fuss. They are ok on straights but extreme care is needed where track needs to be joined on curves. Yes, I know this is to be avoided but if you have greater than 3rd radius curves on your layout, you will need to do this. Due to the SL114's small size, rails can easily become disconnected when laying and aligning your track precisely
My suggestion for OO scale Code 75 bullhead, is solder 2 straights together at the joiners then lay the track and trim as required. DCC Concepts \ Legacy bullhead joiners dont fit Peco bullhead easily. Ask me how I know!
Peco also say SL110s can be used to join bullhead. Ive opened 3 packs of SL110s and not one fits onto the rail even after dressing the track ends. Trying to ease the joiners open is an even bigger PITA! Ive used thin bladed screwdrivers and a stanley knife to try and open these up but all Ive done is either ruined the joiner or ended up with something that looks unacceptable with lumps and bumps along its length.
To me, it is simply unacceptable that these rail joiners are so difficult to work with. If anyone has tips for opening up SL110s without ruining them, please let me know how.
So how's it going? The frames and baseboards are up and painted. 3mm deep cork trackbed, bought in 10 metre rolls have all be laid and glued in position. I need tolift some of the trackbed because I intend to have an engine shed near the top left of the shown track plan. However, I hadnt considered the width of the building and open areas within for the track. See, there's always something!
Ive started laying track from the bottom right points and outer lines. Ive tried various positions for droppers. My dropper wire is about 0.75mm, Code 75 is not much higher so, soldering on the outside of the track neatly is difficult. Soldering the droppers on the bottom of the track is the better option but then you have to be accurate drilling a hole in the trackbed else youmight find the track is pushed out of position by 5-10mm. Drill a large hole in the first place is the answer to this but be careful else your baseboard might start to resemble swiss cheese.
The main DCC bus wire is 2.5mm copper core side by side premium speaker wire. This should eliminate the need to twist the bus wires together. Well, it works for Larry Puckett, The DCC Guy so I'll let you know if I have issues. Point motors are DCC Concepts IP Analogs that will be run off a 12v DC bus. Im considering using MegaPoint Controllers System 2 but Dave seems to be a little slow answering my mails about this. Maybe he's too busy working on Pete waterman's Making Tracks 3?
).
Funny because it's absolutely true!