Fancy critiquing a proposed new loft layout - all feedback appreciated!

[Mountain]

There are converter tracks or converter railjoiners built to join code 75 track to code 100, but it is cheaper to solder them together at the same railheight and file off the excess solder than buy the converter parts. Just pack up under the lower section of track with card or something similar so both track being joined is the same height prior to soldering.
Branch lines in some areas still have lower profile track, and also, wooden sleepers with lower profile track panels (A track panel is the railway equivalent of sectional track) are used in sinky marshy areas as these may need to be lifted now and then, repacked with fresh ballast and placed back as part of toutine maintenance. The wooden sleepers do not crack if the ground becomes unstable underneath them which is why wood is still used to this day, as wood flexes. Due to this, most paintwork also has wooden sleepers, as points have a lot of movement and flex, and wood copes better for this. Is why Peco may sell concrete sleepers lengths of track but do not sell concrete sleepers pointwork as it is actually rare unless things have changed.

[Bigmet]

...the curved points positioned just before the tunnel mouths were prone to rolling stock derailment. I have avoided use of the curved points although I would be interested to know anyone else’s experience with these.

When I was in much the same position you are now in, resuming railway modelling, an early action was to systematically test the potentially useful point work in the Peco code 100 range, for unconditional reliability in any move the real railway performed, pulling and propelling at appropriate low speed, with trains of up to 60 four wheel wagons or 14 bogie carriages. The medium and large radius points including the Y passed. The *curved point was reliable for transit of freight trains only in the trailing direction on the larger 30" radius; it wasn't tested with carriage stock as the minimum ruling radius for passenger was 36" and the planned minimum radius for freight 30". The smaller radius points were not tested.

Now, none of the above is authoritative, as it depends on my track laying ability and rolling stock adjustment for matching coupler height and free rolling wheelsets of uniform standard: the fine control for consistent slow movement was taken care of by DCC. All I can offer is that subsequent experience bore out the test results.

*In better news, Peco have since released a code 83 range with much larger radius pointwork for the North American market, suitable for off scene use and rather useful where a double slip and curved points would be useful space savers in these locations.

[aleopardstail]

frustratingly there are issues with the code 100 track, manageable ones but issues all the same

specifically the crossing/frog angles vary, which makes using different points near each other more awkward than it should be

found the only times I've used curved points (years ago, in N) they worked fine if the approach track was also a curve, but were a problem is preceded by a straight, last time I needed them in OO I made my own to fit the required curves

[Arianne]

frustratingly there are issues with the code 100 track, manageable ones but issues all the same

specifically the crossing/frog angles vary, which makes using different points near each other more awkward than it should be

found the only times I've used curved points (years ago, in N) they worked fine if the approach track was also a curve, but were a problem is preceded by a straight, last time I needed them in OO I made my own to fit the required curves

@aleopardstail - your last sentence is exactly what I now recall from the YouTube video. The points were on a curve when emerging from the tunnel but not when entering from the other direction, this being a straight section of track. Thank you. Useful information.

The PECO 100 and the use of back2back points between parallel tracks - I’d forgotten about that so thank you for the reminder. Another thing to consider as part of my testing regime.

Block Detection
I see that ESU market the ECOS Detecter. I don’t pretend to yet know how it works in detail, nor the wiring. However, I think this may be an interesting conversation to have with either the folk at the model railway shop in Linlithgow or with the guys from DCC Concepts. The tunnel is a potential accident black spot, plus the bi-directional running on one track for Branch work. The suggestion of future proofing it by wiring it for limited block detection and automation (safety only) appeals. I don’t fancy going much further with the automation (perhaps just some preprogrammed stopping as has been mentioned). It rather seems to me that full, or near full, automation takes the hobby to a different place? Computer programming. Each to their own but that’s a step too far for me.

Right, thank you everyone. It’s midnight here in Italy now so I’m checking out. Nice chatting though!

Best wishes.

[Mountain]

I also would say that curved points are the most likely area any de-railment will likely occur because curved points have larger frog areas causing wheels to experience "Frog bounce".

I am told that the symetrical 3 way points can be problematic for other reasons but I have never once had any issues. But for good reliable running, only use curved points if one has to. Is not a "Must not use them". Is more of "Use them if one can't fit anything else".

Something that some modellers may not be aware of though this would natrually void any warranty, is that points can be altered in geometry if needed by slightly bending them to fit. Is easier to remove some plastic webbing between some sleepers and use old points obtained secondhand at cheap prices for this so that if they break, it does not matter, but one can carefully persuade points to fit as long as the bend is only a slight bend needed... Take it too far and it won't work or may even break so take it gentle if one tries.
Alternatively, using copper clad sleepers (Made from printed circuit board) to make points via the soldering method isn't all that difficult once one learns how to do it. Is a learning curve of trial and error to find what angles work and what do not, but it is surprizing what one can do with a little thought. The most complicated part is to work out which rails need isolating from others. Likewise, broken RTR points can be repaired with PCB sleepers if needed. Surprizing how a good soldering iron and a decent heavy duty stand can open up a whole new world in this hobby!

[SRman]

The plan looks very good to me, combining a tail-chaser as well as the operational possibilities of the end to end branch.

As you said, you have avoided having any point motors directly over the main line tracks, but you have also avoided having any points hidden under anything, which is also very good, making maintenance much easier.

Thank, much appreciated. I recall watching a piece, possibly from the Dean Park loft layout, in which he stated that the curved points positioned just before the tunnel mouths were prone to rolling stock derailment. I have avoided use of the curved points although I would be interested to know anyone else’s experience with these?

Regards.

I use quite a few Peco code 100 large radius curved points and have no problems with them at all. On a past layout I even cut the webbing between some of the sleepers and tightened the radii just a little to suit a particular location. There are a couple of locations where curved points replace what would have been a transition curve - it's not quite the same thing but it still works in leading trains gently out of tighter curves. They are also useful for crossovers on curves, making better use of available space and improving the "flow" of the track.

[Arianne]

Good morning and thanks for the additional guidance on the use of curved points. I’ll consider them with caution, always paying attention to the smooth radius and potential for misalignment at the fishplate.

The tweaking of the sleepers and slight realignment of points is interesting and good to know. This may be a tad advanced for me at this stage in my journey.

Ever so helpful. Goodness, some of you people not only know your stuff but also pursue the most incredible level of authenticity in replicating real life, as was back in the day. I think that may be a bit beyond me but…..respect!

Have a good day!

[aleopardstail]

block work for limited safety stuff can work nicely, even if its as simple as a red light on a panel to show a hidden track is occupied. could go a bit further with interlocking but to be honest on a manually driven layout a nice red warning light is usually enough.

one other thing that may held, though sadly not with points, if you have an insulated gap on a curve, watch out, the nylon rail joiners are not amazingly rigid and can case slight dogleg joins. can be corrected by making sure the sleepers are fixed (glue, pins, whatever) firmly either side so its them and not the rail joiners holding the alignment

[aleopardstail]

The plan looks very good to me, combining a tail-chaser as well as the operational possibilities of the end to end branch.

As you said, you have avoided having any point motors directly over the main line tracks, but you have also avoided having any points hidden under anything, which is also very good, making maintenance much easier.

Thank, much appreciated. I recall watching a piece, possibly from the Dean Park loft layout, in which he stated that the curved points positioned just before the tunnel mouths were prone to rolling stock derailment. I have avoided use of the curved points although I would be interested to know anyone else’s experience with these?

Regards.

I use quite a few Peco code 100 large radius curved points and have no problems with them at all. On a past layout I even cut the webbing between some of the sleepers and tightened the radii just a little to suit a particular location. There are a couple of locations where curved points replace what would have been a transition curve - it's not quite the same thing but it still works in leading trains gently out of tighter curves. They are also useful for crossovers on curves, making better use of available space and improving the "flow" of the track.

Train-Tech Sensor Signal with Feather - 1 - 1000x768.jpg

curved crossovers are also good on a station approach, not just for saving space but because they avoid the "S" curve

[centenary]

Set track curved points, not so good because the angle can be too sharp. Fine scale curve points are better as their angle is more gentle.

Id avoid set track like the plague but that's just my opinion!

[SRman]

Set track curved points, not so good because the angle can be too sharp. Fine scale curve points are better as their angle is more gentle.

Id avoid set track like the plague but that's just my opinion!

I agree absolutely. The geometry of those set track ones is highly suspect, with radii being only nominally overall figures, not consistent through the point length.

[Arianne]

block work for limited safety stuff can work nicely, even if its as simple as a red light on a panel to show a hidden track is occupied. could go a bit further with interlocking but to be honest on a manually driven layout a nice red warning light is usually enough.

one other thing that may held, though sadly not with points, if you have an insulated gap on a curve, watch out, the nylon rail joiners are not amazingly rigid and can case slight dogleg joins. can be corrected by making sure the sleepers are fixed (glue, pins, whatever) firmly either side so its them and not the rail joiners holding the alignment

Thanks @aleopardstail - both good points (no pun intended). A modest, limited element of block work / occupancy detection is probably going to be the sweet spot for me. Just to help avoid what I would otherwise foresee as inevitable accidents, that’s all. I’ll wire up accordingly even though the need won’t arise until much later in the build and track laying. I will have a chat with those that ‘should know about these things’ - either a retailer or at upcoming exhibitions - so I understand how the wiring, connections and operations work. I’m hoping the ECoS detecter should simplify things as, from what I have read (and could actually understand from the words!), I think the detecter monitors the voltage drop within the block, pings a message to the EcoS Command Unit and the command unit then displays the blocks on screen etc. As a start I think I will probably rely upon the EcoS command screen for quite a lot. I suspect that eventually I’ll tire of the switching between screens and may end up eventually doing something else, including a possible laptop and old TFT monitor hooked up to the EcoS controller. But that’s far, far downstream. I’m also mindful of the other thread that I’ve just started reading about the advantages of simplicity within layout design - reliability and operational joy. Makes sense. I have a Range Rover Velar, owned from new. It’s not simple and……it’s not reliable (as is the case for almost all these complex Exec SUVs). The Chief Technician at the dealership, who is a lovely guy, recently joined me for a test drive in our car. He suggested that the best approach is to pop in every six months so the dealer can undertake a health check on the car (we all know the underlying driver for this!). I respectfully replied that my Velar never makes it to the six month point without a visit to the dealer due to something having gone wrong! The Chief Technician just nodded knowingly from the driver’s seat as we completed the test drive.

Plastic insulating joints….that makes sense. They look like a possible weak link whenever I see them in photos or video. Thanks for the heads-up though. Honestly, collecting all this information is truly priceless. I fully accept that I will be screwing up at some point but if I can minimise the frequency and the cost in time, money and frustration…..priceless.

Best wishes.

[Mountain]

Though insulated railjoints are better, one can also use resin or similar as the idea is to prevent insulating gaps from touching if the track moves.

viewtopic.php?t=52212&start=60

Though not photographed after finished, the end result was hardly noticable after the excess was filed down to shape.

Only slight downside to resin is that it does ever so slightly spring with age but if it does pour down some runny superglue into the crack and it is problem solved.

I have heard people using araldyte as well instead of an insulated railjoiner which was not only said to be most effective, but also held the rails in place so they became really firm when set.

If using other methods do check they are still insulated after they have set or glued etc.

[aleopardstail]

wiring it up for this in the future is pretty simple say you have a tunnel with some points at the ends - make the bit between the points its own block, insulated joiners both ends, initially its power feed gets joined to the rest, later can rewire without moving the track, or not as required.

its one of those things thats easier to do right at the off, and really the only change is the insulated joiners as you really want the extra feeds anyway - note if its just block detection you can just isolate one rail - leaving metal joiners on the other which hold the alignment better

[aleopardstail]

one thing that may be worth noting, since it all gets build in stages anyway..

build the board and lay maybe two loops or one with a few sidings, basically have that as a test track to experiment with the point motors, wiring etc, fiddle with that for a bit and use it as a learning exercise which will make building the rest a lot easier