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

[Arianne]

Hello Forum Members

I’m looking for some generous folk to cast a critical eye across my AnyRail track plan. All comments and suggestions are appreciated. Getting the plan right, including operationally, is important and will avoid many (but not all) of the headaches later on. With this in mind, can I thank you from the start for reading my post and taking the time to help me.

So, what do we have here? A proposed layout for my attic, sizes are shown on the plan. OO scale. It will be laid upon 12mm plyboard (cork track bed underlay) within the ‘V’ of the roof framework, as is the case for the Dean Park layout https://youtu.be/HLa-WUGSEu8?si=Vo-mEbKPlXKGb3VZ. This very much determines the approximate size and shape of the layout. I will have a ‘duck-under’ access to the central operating area. We have had two Velux windows installed, power and lighting. If we can restrict feedback to the track plan rather than the structural integrity of the attic space and building regulations since these have already been considered and cleared. I live in Southern Scotland so the attic doesn’t get too hot and the roof orientation is broadly east-west. There is little south facing roof slope.

Budget is not the primary issue. Getting it right for smooth running and operational pleasure is the key requirement. I enjoy some landscaping but prefer the running of the trains rather than endless time spent landscaping intricate urban scenes, countryside being reasonably straightforward by comparison. I think the implication of this is that the plan is fairly track-heavy. It’s to be a DCC layout, using the ECoS 50220 Controller and an ESU mobile control handset. Cobalt iP Digital, slow throw point motors will be mounted beneath the board. Separate track and accessories bus, droppers to every track piece (that’s the intention anyway), soldered connections and the use of four or five power districts (mainline fast twin track, mainline slow twin track, branch line, goods area by North Station). Do you think that the four mainline loops should be separate power districts? Any thoughts on boosters and surge protection?

I prefer a ‘tail-chaser’ oval over a pure end-to-end layout. The plan includes a four-track mainline (two outer ‘slow’ lines and two centre fast / scenic train lines). On the western side the slow, westernmost line, also carries branch traffic and so will be bi-directional when a branch train is on this section of track. On the eastern side, the mainlines enter a tunnel, accessible to a human hand only via the outside edge of the eastern baseboard. This lengthy area of covered track should enable me to pause long trains and help mitigate the mindless round & round effect – providing I don’t forget that I have a train stationary in the tunnel and collide with it (I’m not yet planning to utilise block detection which would negate this risk). The branch line runs atop this area and I have ensured that no point motors for the branch will be mounted directly above the mainline track below (learned from Chadwick layout / Charlie Bishop https://youtu.be/l0_hk3yQ8Jw?si=ljScEJqWIfX0BwRG).

The main stations (north & south) have platforms which should take six-coach BR Mk1 rakes. The branch line should accommodate a maximum of three coaches, always using smaller tank engines rather than the larger tender engines of the mainline. I thought that I might enjoy some limited assembly of freight traffic which is why I have the sidings in front of the North Station, thereby allowing ease of manual decoupling.
Although the turntable uses quite a lot of space, I do need this facility since I want to be able to rotate my larger tender engines. I don’t have space for a reverse loop. The period is early BR through to late-1960s since this will allow me to run both steam and diesel. I am not too fixed on prototype accuracy; an approximation will suffice. Livery changes were always gradual in real life so it’s credible that both early and late crest BR stock would be running simultaneously.

There’s a dummy, cosmetic line heading south under the viaduct but the line running off to the lower-west will connect, off scene, to a fiddle yard for storage of rolling stock. Trains will enter and exit the scenic part of the layout from here.

I have had three layouts in my younger years. I have rolling stock stored from the late-1990s, the locomotives of which are not DCC. The best of these will be converted after careful servicing from being mothballed. The track from that earlier layout is PECO Set Track 100 which I may choose to use in the fiddle yard. If I do then access to the fiddle yard will include a converter from PECO Streamline 75. I also have PECO point motors from those earlier days which I may use in the fiddle yard rather than pay for the expensive DCC Concepts motors here. I am now retired, since age 56. So far, I’ve had three glorious years since finishing with corporate life which left little time for this hobby – I’m pretty handy, recently fitting a kitchen, redecorating the house, replacing much of the central heating system, car maintenance (brakes & discs replacement) and travelling across Europe (our son lives in Como City, by the lake in Italy – we spend about 50% of the year with him). I see this project as long-term, especially on those driech days that one gets in Scotland all too often. If I start now, on what may be my final layout, I am still fit enough to clamber under the boards to run the wiring, install point motors etc – although I am hoping to do most of this by flipping the boards before final fixing. Leave it too long and maybe that’ll be beyond me!

There you have it. Over to you all. Let rip, say whatever you wish since I genuinely want to hear it all. Now is the stage for changes, rethinking etc. I am truly grateful and hope, one day, to help others when I have gained sufficient knowledge and confidence.

Thank you in advance. It’s good to be back modelling railways!

[centenary]

A nice large area for a layout. One of the things I forgot when planning my layout is where all the associated electrics and control modules were going to be positioned; Things like DCC control station, PSUs, track boosters, circuit breakers and any mimic \ control panels etc! Then there was the scenics and roads etc.

Some people dont like too many straight lines on a layout but I think it depends on how fast / slow you want your trains to run, jiggly lines dont make for fast trains. As far as the layout plan goes, imho, there's too many stations for me. Even if you keep all the stations, how are people supposed to access them for the trains? Id also be inclined to replace the branch terminus at bottom left and turn it into a full blown goods yard.

Are you going to be using bullhead track if going Code 75? If so, this makes Unifrogs even better as you dont have to muck about making them DCC friendly like you do with electrofrogs. Mentioning Charlie Bishop, he stated that even old coaching stock that would normally ground on Code 75, ran smoothly on bullhead. However, I dont know if that holds for all rolling stock, though.

Even when I thought Id got my final design (must have gone through 50 iterations in AR!) Ive been tweaking it during the build!

'Duck unders' are great when you're spritely. I consider myself quite active but wifey who has dodgey knees isnt so I had to build in a lifting section. If there's only yourself ever going to access the train room it may not be an issue but even then, a tweaked back or other less agile people may have issues crawling under the baseboards.

HTH!

[glencairn]

[quote=centenary post_id=718732 time=1752172012 user_id=14151

'Duck unders' are great when you're spritely. I consider myself quite active but wifey who has dodgey knees isnt so I had to build in a lifting section. If there's only yourself ever going to access the train room it may not be an issue but even then, a tweaked back or other less agile people may have issues crawling under the baseboards.

HTH!
[/quote]

And they hurt! Yes. Been there.

Glencairn

[Arianne]

@centenary - thank you so much for your thoughts.

Too many stations… I think you are right. My inner voice told me this as I was planning it on the laptop. Will give this further thought and prune things back a bit.

Straight track… fair point. I don’t enjoy fast running trains since they begin to look unreal at scale. I’m happy with even the trains on the fast mainline cantering along at a modest speed. The issue is about platform design when one wants to have sufficient length for a decent rake of coaches. Curved sections are trickier. Hmm. Again, food for thought. Even some variation might create greater aesthetic appeal.

Bullhead rail… hadn’t thought this through so will do some further research. Pushes the cost up but might be worth it. I’ll give this some consideration.

Scarred bald head from ‘Duck-under’… I will think about a removable section, effectively a modular piece etc. Some additional viewing on YouTube. I’m agile now but that won’t last forever. One of my friends, Fred (he is a lovely gentleman somewhat older than me but valuable for his life-advice) wouldn’t be ducking under anywhere!

Space for Base Station etc… the central operating area is a decent size. I think I will just build out a little for the hardware. A good reminder and all too easy to overlook. Better to design in now than later.

Thanks again. This is why one puts the proposal out there. The wisdom of crowds - although apparently the expression, whilst it sounds credible, isn’t factually accurate

I have every expectation of further revisions of the plan, including real-time changes as the actual track and wiring / point motors are offered up to the board.

Best wishes.

[Phred]

Arianne wrote:
The wisdom of crowds - although apparently the expression, whilst it sounds credible, isn’t factually accurate

Sadly, the wisdom of this crowd is somewhat compromised by people like me dropping in to make fatuous comments.

PS: Welcome aboard, Arianne.

[Bigmet]

This clearly fulfills the wish for a ' see the trains running' layout, which is what I enjoy.
Comments:
Put a lot more storage loops in alongside the running lines where most convenient, as you will acquire A LOT MORE STOCK unless you have the discipline most of us lack!
The turntable is best placed on a line independent from the loco shed roads - a good (prototypical) arrangement is to have the turntable behind the loco shed. That way you can turn a loco without interference from shedded loco movements.
Don't buy the Peco converter trash if joining code 100 to code 75, easily accomplished by modifying the regular railjoiners which someone with your skillset can do very swiftly.

DCC. My opinion is that European manufactured RTR OO is not optimal for DCC control, as its design predates DCC, Hornby pickups with a live chassis block in particualr are not good news, obviously can be rewired to eliminate this.
The decoders are optimised for low current draw can motors, and traction tyres and plastic rolling stock wheels are bad news for the quantity of track dirt they generate, interfering with reliable pick up.
A 5A DCC system will comfortably run a layout of this size: and design in an independent length of track as a programme track somewhere convenient for the DCC base station, which is essential for testing that every loco has the motor fully isolated from track power with the DCC decoder installed, with no risk to the decoder.
I have my layout with each running line on a switch, so that when a DCC system trip occurs and the cause is not immediately apparent, switching off all sections, DCC reset, and then switching on the sections in turn until a trip occurs, quickly tells you where to look.

HTH, have fun, that's the main thing.

[aleopardstail]

Thoughts:

wire it for block detection even if you do not plan to use it, will give plenty of droppers and can always add it later, in part of full - with this much track some automation is going to be useful - even if its the "dumb" automation of "one train per loop running as a set speed" so no real chance of a collision - you will struggle to keep an eye on it all and you may find indicator lights for harder to see areas useful - e.g. face one way and can keep an eye on the mainlines behind you as you drive the branch.

power districts.. comes down to how many trains you want to run at once, potentially "up main", "down main", "branch" and "fiddle yard" districts

"too many stations", really comes down to how you want to run it, this is also where some basic automation stuff comes in, and I do mean basic, something that can say a mainline train stops at the larger stations every other circuit for a while then goes again, a smaller train similar but with the smaller stations as well. but as you have it its good the "West Halt" gives the branch trains somewhere else to stop before they hit the bays at "North Station"

other tweaks..

North Station wants a kick back headshunt for the two bay platforms parallel to the inner loop to allow a shunter to pull coaches back and put into the other bay otherwise shunting fouls the mainline

other issue, your fiddle yard line, this presumably goes to a ladder, with/without reverse loop capability, this can only easily access the outer loop without a fair bit of "wrong way" running - now if the plan is the yard is used to store alternative trains and you awap about manually every so often onto and off the layout this really doesn't matter - but if its part of normal running you will find it restricting - I'd look at a second point ladder to the right hand side under the branch and in the tunnel area, now all four tracks can run directly into and out of the yard, you also have space to reverse a train onto the layouts outer two tracks without really seeing it - indeed I'd actually have a second yard line entirely under the branch specifically for this (does mean losing the dummy track though)

overall it looks good, expensive but that is what it is and you know your budget

I'd say above all else though, prep the loft space properly first, proper floor, good insulation and ventilation, plus power and lighting.

those cobalt motors have the advantage oif no soldering under the boards but you do want to consider accessibility and lighting when under there, also really really plan the electrics, where will the wiring panels be, how big do they need to be, where will various modules live, accessibility, power supplies.

as I say I'd got for designing "for but not with" block detection, which is quite simple but means considering the space.

also invest in a wire labelling machine and proper crimp tools, plus decide on a wiring colour scheme, all simple stuff but worth doing.

plus have a thing on the actual build sequence, I'd be tempted to pick one mainline, probably the inner one and build that first, all the points in and wired, test it as you go etc.

and if you find any niggles, fix them before going further..

I think as a concept its lovely, could easily have four trains circling, while you play with the branch, then park up a main loop to bring the branch through

one final thought, right hand side, add a 5th line on the inside, this joins the above noted bay platform kickback and extends it either to the south station or to a hidden point in the tunnels - basically means branch traffic crosses all four roads at the south station but then has its own approach to the north station - and it doubles up as a "goods" line running both directions, means mainline trians don't need to be held for as long when running the branch? just a thought, the "everything must stop" nature could be a feature though - this also avoids bi-directional mainline running on the inner loop

[Arianne]

@Bigmet and @aleopardstail

Thank you so much for the time you have taken to consider this, especially the operational potential and pitfalls. Sometimes, when you’ve spent ages designing the thing, you can no longer see the ‘wood for the trees’. Ever so helpful.

What I will need to do now is read these messages back in my iPad while I have the track plan open alongside on my laptop. I need to follow through on your detailed comments by examining the plan and tweaking it as I go.

I can’t thank you enough - indeed everyone that has read and responded to my call for help.

We’re about to leave the mountains of Austria, Voralberg tomorrow for Como. We had 2-3 days of alpine rain which enabled me to create and refine the track plan prior to posting it on our forum. I anticipated this weather, brought the laptop along and enjoyed the process as a result (there’s no joy walking in the mountains in the pouring rain and cloud). I’ll get back to AnyRail next week and may use this thread if I have further need for help, which I think I will

Meanwhile, I need to learn a bit more about wiring for block detection and some basic signalling / automation (the EcoS command station can do this although switching between screens probably means I may use a DCC Concepts board).

Any further feedback welcomed.

Best wishes.

[Bigmet]

...Any further feedback welcomed.

And take your time at a pace that's comfortable. Every hour of well researched planning will pay off in long term enjoyment.

[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.

[Mountain]

I have hung back a little so I apologize, but here are some thoughts.

If one is building a nice large layout, one is more likely to have a variety of different wheel standards on ones stock, so it is easier to use code 100 rail (If one models in 00) than a lower profile rail. If one is starting out from scratch so one can confine oneself to modern wheel standards then lower profile rail such as code 75 or using the new bullhead rail etc is great. (Bullhead rail was only used on branch lines or on sidings in later years but in the past (Before the 1950's or 1960's or slightly later depending where one lived) most standard gauge lines in Britain were of this type of rail). Both concrete sleepers and continously welded rail were used in some parts of the UK from around the 1950's onwards, such as the stretch between Whitland and Clunderwen in Wales which had some of the early experiments when this type of track first came in. Think it was concrete sleepers they experimented with there but it may have been continously welded rail. Difficult to date things as a general rule as there were always exceptions. The GWR used colour light signals in the 1930's, though some semaphore signals in some areas are only now to this day being replaced by modern equivalents! So research into the general area and the date one wants to portray (And the models one wants to run) is the way to go to decide what track to use... But if one wants to run a bit of everything in 00 gauge models, code 100 will allow for running both finescale and deeper flanged wheels, though some Triang models will need point flangeways adapted to do this and one may need to look at buying sectional track points which have more generous flangeways... It all depends what one wants to run!

Now in regards to your lovely layout plans... is a lot of track so it will not be cheap. Also consider the more track one has, the more track cleaning one will need to do. Nice to plan something big, but bear this in mind just incase one is not aware of this.

But yes! Dream big and plan big and it will keep one busy for years to come, and I really love the "Dummy line" idea! Really looks great!

[Arianne]

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.

[Arianne]

I have hung back a little so I apologize, but here are some thoughts.

If one is building a nice large layout, one is more likely to have a variety of different wheel standards on ones stock, so it is easier to use code 100 rail (If one models in 00) than a lower profile rail. If one is starting out from scratch so one can confine oneself to modern wheel standards then lower profile rail such as code 75 or using the new bullhead rail etc is great. (Bullhead rail was only used on branch lines or on sidings in later years but in the past (Before the 1950's or 1960's or slightly later. ……….

………But yes! Dream big and plan big and it will keep one busy for years to come, and I really love the "Dummy line" idea! Really looks great!

Thank you @Mountain - here’s my reasoning. It’s a bit detailed but I suspect many of us on this forum invest ourselves in our hobby for many and varied reasons. I’m just age 60. I’ve enjoyed the first three years of my retirement very much. As is often written, or YouTube’d, retirement unfolds in chapters. The first few years have been quite an adventure with many pent-up projects completed in the house, garden and the usual travel bug thrown in.

The whole house is done, with the exception of the family bathroom and ongoing planned maintenance. SWMBO is happy with her new Kitchen, that and the Utility Room having been gutted back to the bare walls and concrete floor. I popped across to the Scottish Model Railway Exhibition in Glasgow’s SECC a few months back with two friends. In the car we spoke about our plans and I said that I would defer restarting my hobby until I was older and travelling less.

But then I read a few articles and watched some videos. In one, Charlie Bishop explained that one risk is that we leave it so late that we never finish the project. That got me thinking. My Father-in-Law, lovely guy that he was, had always been very handy with the tools. He’d been a carpenter before moving into management for Ashby & Horner / P&O Bovis. But I saw his manual dexterity and eyesight diminish over the years of his retirement. It occurs to me that my own ability to undertake the planning, construction and intricate tasks associated with this hobby will also diminish as I age, sadly. Certainly for a project of this scale.

We’ve lived in our house since 2008. I love the house. It’s a good fit for us. Nothing grandiose, just a good balance of space but not a burden (I had thought about retiring to a bigger pad with more land but then realised I would end up spending my days too bound to the garden). So, we plan to stay put for a good few years longer.

I see this as a long, long term project. Something that will keep me happily engaged, mentally challenged and learning for years to come - mental boredom is something I detest but neither do I want the stress of corporate life in senior business management anymore (I’ve truly had enough of all that). The budget is available, courtesy of the Global Index Tracker Fund, and the cost will be gradual over time, alongside my family who have already mentioned that they at least will know what to buy me for future gifts!

When I return from Italy in a couple of weeks I will begin by buying a length or two of PECO SL75 plus a point. I’ll power it with my analogue controller and test run my old rolling stock. Then I can make a call about code 75 or 100. Some folk have said that 75 is easier to work with on curves compared to 100 flextrack. That’s one of the appeals to me but I’m not yet decided. I will test it first and then choose.

Once the frame and boards are in position, I will focus on the inner track, as has been suggested earlier on this thread. I’ll take my time, learning as I go. Forgive the cliche but….the journey is as important, if not more so, than the destination in my case.

I’m in no huge rush and I see this as simply another strand in a tapestry of my life which will add variety, challenge and interest. These are important for long-term mental and, by extension, physical health. So much focus is placed upon the financial planning of retirement that the emotional and physical elements can often be overlooked.

So yes, I know I am dreaming fairly big here. The fourth layout of my life, not including the Hornby carpet, battery operated, loop while I was at primary school given as a Christmas gift by my parents (the loop was in the lounge because that was the only room with a gas fire and heating!).

Let’s see how it goes. I will invest in some tools and play about with things in my garage as part of the learning curve and testing prior to any serious construction beginning in the attic.

Finally, the earlier reference to Block Detection. Hmm. That looks complex and expensive. My biggest concern is the propensity for an accident when I have a train sitting idle in the tunnel. I can see myself driving another train into the tunnel on the same line, impossible with analogue but all too easy with DCC. I wonder whether a simpler, albeit not foolproof, method might be to have some signals controlling each line as it enters the tunnel. When I stop a train inside the tunnel, I set the signal to red? If anyone has other ideas then please let me know. It’ll be some time before we get to the stage where the risk becomes real.

Thanks everyone again for your time and input. Further comments and thoughts are always welcome. Agree or disagree, it matters not. That’s how we learn by being open to ideas and suspending judgement.

Best wishes.

[Mountain]

If you have a model shop nearby, you could buy a length of code 75 to test it on your locos and stock when you get home. If it is too shallow, one can always use the length for a siding, as on real railways after the modernisation plan, higher profile rail came in and the lower profile rail no redundant from the main line was used in sidings, so even to this day one can see this mix.

[Arianne]

If you have a model shop nearby, you could buy a length of code 75 to test it on your locos and stock when you get home. If it is too shallow, one can always use the length for a siding, as on real railways after the modernisation plan, higher profile rail came in and the lower profile rail no redundant from the main line was used in sidings, so even to this day one can see this mix.

@Mountain - Rainbow Railways at Linlithgow. About an hour or so by car. I could go to Edinburgh but I’ve already suggested a trip to Linlithgow to the wife, sweetened by the offer of lunch out to make a day of it. As you say, any surplus track from this ‘trial’ can be redeployed - possibly as a post-Beeching Report cut back at one of the two smaller stations.

Thanks again for your most detailed and helpful advice.