OO gauge (1:76) British prototype layout design -- suggestions for improvement highly welcome!

[Anonymous]

Hello everybody,

I'm planning to build my first layout [;)] To add to the number of problems, it shall be a British prototype layout even though I'm Austrian. At least I live in England so I can examine the contemporary situation a bit. The scale is 1:76 (OO gauge), i.e. running on the same gauge as H0.

Space is a major issue for me and everything wider than 60cm (two feet) is impossible. Nevertheless I'd still like to use 1:76 since it should be nicer to look at and easier to model, as well as offering more scope for scratch building even without the mechanical skills of a watchmaker [;)]

Here are the two track plans so far: http://haardt.net/transfer/oolayouts.gif

The one at the top is basically just an extension of the one at the bottom. The top layout (310x59cm or approx. 10.2x2 feet) could accommodate three long 50s/60s coaches (BR Mk2 stock, about 68 feet prototype length) plus a long steam engine (about 75 feet long), the bottom layout (252x59cm or approx. 8.3x2 feet) one coach less.

Since the width is limited to two feet (60 cm), and since I'd like to "run" trains (at least a bit) I came up with a switchback in a coastal setting. The trains arrive from the top right and run into a mainland rural terminal (top left). From there, the switchback starts via the lower right to an island situated at the bottom left.

The top layout could also (as shown in the track plan) include a small pier railway running from the island terminal out towards the sea, serviced by either tube-like railcars or an old small steam engine with a four-wheel vintage coach.

Track material is Peco Code 100 Streamline, the straight and curved pieces of track (Peco Code 100 Setrack) shall be replaced by Peco Code 100 Streamline flex track in the actual layout. The radii used are 24" and 36" for both switches and curved track. The switches are all 12 degrees. Operation shall be DCC with the Digitrax Zephyr. Switching and uncoupling perhaps manually, but I'm net yet entirely sure about that.

What do you think about these track plans? Any obvious "don'ts" which appear in them? Basically I tried to come up with a not completely unrealistic opportunity actually to /run/ full-length coaches in limited space, and these are two of my humble results...

I'd be honestly grateful for any advice you might have.

Best wishes,

David

[selector]

David, a cardinal sin in model railroading, but particularly one like yours (switching/industrial) is to offer the loco engineer a "way around". You have not provided any runaround trackage in either main yard.

To start, the very top-most track, the one ending halway towards the right top, should meet the one south of it, and very near where you have it ending. Find a way to get other intersections along your yards, even if you can only manage it between any two tracks.

I'll continue to study your plan and see what else I can suggest.

-Crandell

[selector]

Immediately below both your "wye" switches, at the throat of each yard, you have a butt-ended section. There is no obvious reason for either. Why are they there? Why are they so short?

Sorry if my questions are bluntly asked, but they need to be asked. [:D]

[Anonymous]

Hello Crandell,

Thank you very much for your suggestions. You are right about the need to include more intersections and runaround trackage.

About the issue which you raise in your second post: basically, the "geography" of the layout (island, bridge, need to have at least some minimal distance between the two termini, etc.) prohibits the "opening" three-way turnouts from coming already earlier on. As a result, some space is left blank which is why I included the butt-ended sections as an additional siding. No real reason though.

I'll try to incorporate your suggestions into updated versions of the track plans and post them here as soon as I'm done.

Once again many thanks and best wishes,

David