Great video! You can also simply duplicate the selected 'bent-to-curve' flex track and change the radius in the inspector in the sidebar to the right instead of inserting a new flex track and turning it into a curved flex track each time. Hope that saves some time!
Julian, with your laser cutter, you could create for yourself a set of easement templates. From straight track tightening thru 1200mm , 800mm into your chosen radius, in a short distance. Make it 16.5 mm wide and cut yourself a 'tracksetta' type guide. include holes in it for securing the curve. I've made for myself a full range of custom flexitrack tracksetta shapes, in 2 different lengths, for each radius. cut in 3mm acrylic. Plus I cut, two different easement radius templates, one curving in only 100 mm, and another curving into 600mm radius over 300 mm length of flexitrack. Engrave the surface with the radius change points so that the templates are useable for a number of situations...... Enjoy your visit to the UK.
Great to see your combined rapid progress on developing the plan. Also glad to see you’ve picked up on the comments about crossovers which I and others made. I believe you’re right to retain the third line throughout. Also, I nearly suggested extending the bay into a loop platform so am pleased you’ve done this too. Personally, I’m still exercised by the problems of routeing trains between the blue and yellow sidings but this is an inherent issue with any layout in this space. So my suggestion this time would be to install a fiddle yard of lengthy, straight sidings parallel with the right hand end window. These would sit on a new bottom layer, under the junction station, and feed off the yellow branch line to the harbour. This would allow you to do away with most of the yellow sidings at the workroom end, many of which might be awkward to access anyway for cleaning, derailments etc. I’d still retain the front one or two yellow sidings at that end for another industry, satisfying Paul’s need for ‘shuttles’ to the harbour. Finally, I’d also be tempted to bring the blue goods yard sidings to the front and place the branch line station at the back, behind them. An operator is more likely to want to fiddle around with marshalling troublesome trucks than fixed rakes of cooperative coaches.
Thank you for your suggestions and possibly worth considering. We decided to steer away from another lower level fiddle yard (one was planned in the previous layout before accurate room measurements were taken) just purely out of becoming too complex. Paul really wants to pursue a modular construction (albeit not for exhibition purposes) so the majority of construction can take place elsewhere and be brought up to the room is sections. The sections will also allow Paul to install/manage electrics on the undersides by lifting panels off rather than crawling underneath the layout. Having too many additional layers/levels given the small, awkward space presents some challenges Paul is not keen to pursue.
The new changes to what was an already good layout, are enhanced for better movement of trains now with the addition of further crossovers etc, into this brilliant workable plan. Well done one and all. And you only asked! 😅 Keep up the excellent work guys. Iain
Hi Julian! I enjoyed watching you make the changes to the plan! I too use RailModeller Pro and it can be a right pain getting flexible track to go where you want it to go, so well done on bringing it under your control! I did wonder about head shunts on the longer sidings, but then I guess you'd lose length again! It's all a compromise I guess! The only other thing was that there now seems to be a point on the lift out section, so I'm assuming that will now be a duck under section? All in all it looks like an excellent track plan for a difficult space! All the best, Ian.
Thanks Ian. There's still tweaks to be made in the plan but I think these will occur during the building and testing/operation phases. Headshunts may well get added here and there. There's going to be quite a bit of planning with the framework and baseboard sections which will come up in the next episode.
Very interesting to watch the process. Thanks for taking the time to put this together and post it. I sometimes watch an American track planner, who's always insistent on including easement curves, but of course Americans mostly have basements the size of Kent.🤣 My only thoughts one the plan were was there scope for more loco to the left/top left of the turntable (I recall Paul had a few weathered-to-derelict (IYSWIM) that he might like to park "out of the way" as it were), and was there any provision for coaling/sanding/refuelling locos?
There's definitely going to be tweaks to the plan along the way, but I think these may occur more during the building and testing/operation phases. This may well include additional static depot sidings for derelict locos and Paul definitely wants to include a fuelling point and coaling stage which are yet to factored into the plan.
Awesome changes. The only thing I would change is the inclusion of a headshunt in the top yard. That way, during an ops session you could have someone making up/breaking up a freight train while a passenger service arrives or departs.
I'd suggest headshunts on all yards, including the shuttle lines from the storage yard by the through station (bottom right of the plan), though that one could also use a runaround loop too. Unless, it's intended for DMU traffic, in which case maybe run the line closer to the station?!
We may well add in further headshunts as Paul progresses. Once all the track is laid and had lots of test operations, I'm sure there'll be tweaks to the track plan.
Hi Julian gone are the days of laying plain paper on the baseboard and marking on it templates from the rail manufactures (lol). Many thanks for sharing your hard work in making what I think are the right changes to the layout plan. Will this system calculate the number of points, crossovers and track required? Looking forward to the next update regards Barry..
Yes, the software does provide what is essentially a shopping list of all the track and points required. It also gives a total lineal length of the track used.
It is just the way the software calculates curves by default. There may be a preference setting to switch to constant radius curves but I haven't explored this.
Personally, I'm not a fan of controlling access to the engine shed roads by means of a turntable. If the turntable fails, you prevent egress for all the stored locomotives, until maintenance comes out to fix it(!). With point access, you might lose some roads when a point fails, but at least some locomotives will still be available. Of course that's not to say, that it's a bad thing, if that's all you have room for on the plan.
Thats very cool, does it calculate how many pieces of track were used, and scale or non scale length of the whole network ?, certainly gives me some confidence if I was going to have a go at design later on...cheers
Yes, the software does provide what is essentially a shopping list of all the track and points required. It also gives a total lineal length of track used which can then be scaled, in this case multiplying by 76 (OO scale) to give a real-world length.
Dear Julian, love the edit. Absolutely agree on the easement from a 4th radius. Just wondering if the settings of the easement can be changed in Rail Modeler Pro? Might it be the parameter for the smallest radius allowed? Love the different throats you’ve added, makes absolute sense. On points or turnouts, I build my own. Hence, I sometimes deviate from connecting all the track, which gives the opportunity to further enhance the alignment of the point work. I do understand that isn’t really an option with set track. Cheerio
Thanks Vincent. There may well be a preference setting that can be changed in the software but I haven't explored this (yet). The idea with this layout is Paul will reuse the points from the previous layout, keeping costs down.
@zodzod9378 I think you’ve missed the point. I found this quite interesting and informative. The changes have greatly improved the layout and I’m sure it will evolve further!
Most software comes with free trial versions (limited in some way) so you can get a feel for the software and see if you like, or in your case, not like it.
Great video!
You can also simply duplicate the selected 'bent-to-curve' flex track and change the radius in the inspector in the sidebar to the right instead of inserting a new flex track and turning it into a curved flex track each time. Hope that saves some time!
Masterful. You've got a design that is well useable, hours of enjoyment, for Paul
Julian, with your laser cutter, you could create for yourself a set of easement templates.
From straight track tightening thru 1200mm , 800mm into your chosen radius, in a short distance.
Make it 16.5 mm wide and cut yourself a 'tracksetta' type guide. include holes in it for securing the curve.
I've made for myself a full range of custom flexitrack tracksetta shapes, in 2 different lengths, for each radius. cut in 3mm acrylic.
Plus I cut, two different easement radius templates, one curving in only 100 mm, and another curving into 600mm radius over 300 mm length of flexitrack. Engrave the surface with the radius change points so that the templates are useable for a number of situations......
Enjoy your visit to the UK.
This plan is looking better every time I look at it. Martin. (Thailand) But in the Uk For 3 days.
Really interesting to follow the development of this track plan. Thanks for sharing Julian. Roy.
Great to see your combined rapid progress on developing the plan. Also glad to see you’ve picked up on the comments about crossovers which I and others made.
I believe you’re right to retain the third line throughout. Also, I nearly suggested extending the bay into a loop platform so am pleased you’ve done this too.
Personally, I’m still exercised by the problems of routeing trains between the blue and yellow sidings but this is an inherent issue with any layout in this space. So my suggestion this time would be to install a fiddle yard of lengthy, straight sidings parallel with the right hand end window. These would sit on a new bottom layer, under the junction station, and feed off the yellow branch line to the harbour.
This would allow you to do away with most of the yellow sidings at the workroom end, many of which might be awkward to access anyway for cleaning, derailments etc. I’d still retain the front one or two yellow sidings at that end for another industry, satisfying Paul’s need for ‘shuttles’ to the harbour.
Finally, I’d also be tempted to bring the blue goods yard sidings to the front and place the branch line station at the back, behind them. An operator is more likely to want to fiddle around with marshalling troublesome trucks than fixed rakes of cooperative coaches.
Thank you for your suggestions and possibly worth considering. We decided to steer away from another lower level fiddle yard (one was planned in the previous layout before accurate room measurements were taken) just purely out of becoming too complex. Paul really wants to pursue a modular construction (albeit not for exhibition purposes) so the majority of construction can take place elsewhere and be brought up to the room is sections. The sections will also allow Paul to install/manage electrics on the undersides by lifting panels off rather than crawling underneath the layout. Having too many additional layers/levels given the small, awkward space presents some challenges Paul is not keen to pursue.
The new changes to what was an already good layout, are enhanced for better movement of trains now with the addition of further crossovers etc, into this brilliant workable plan. Well done one and all. And you only asked! 😅 Keep up the excellent work guys. Iain
Thanks Iain, we think it's coming together nicely, bar a few tweaks along the way.
Hi Julian! I enjoyed watching you make the changes to the plan! I too use RailModeller Pro and it can be a right pain getting flexible track to go where you want it to go, so well done on bringing it under your control! I did wonder about head shunts on the longer sidings, but then I guess you'd lose length again! It's all a compromise I guess! The only other thing was that there now seems to be a point on the lift out section, so I'm assuming that will now be a duck under section? All in all it looks like an excellent track plan for a difficult space! All the best, Ian.
Thanks Ian. There's still tweaks to be made in the plan but I think these will occur during the building and testing/operation phases. Headshunts may well get added here and there. There's going to be quite a bit of planning with the framework and baseboard sections which will come up in the next episode.
Nice work, Julian. It took a lot of work, but I quite enjoy doing this (in AnyRail) as long as it works out!
Very interesting to watch the process. Thanks for taking the time to put this together and post it. I sometimes watch an American track planner, who's always insistent on including easement curves, but of course Americans mostly have basements the size of Kent.🤣
My only thoughts one the plan were was there scope for more loco to the left/top left of the turntable (I recall Paul had a few weathered-to-derelict (IYSWIM) that he might like to park "out of the way" as it were), and was there any provision for coaling/sanding/refuelling locos?
There's definitely going to be tweaks to the plan along the way, but I think these may occur more during the building and testing/operation phases. This may well include additional static depot sidings for derelict locos and Paul definitely wants to include a fuelling point and coaling stage which are yet to factored into the plan.
Awesome changes. The only thing I would change is the inclusion of a headshunt in the top yard. That way, during an ops session you could have someone making up/breaking up a freight train while a passenger service arrives or departs.
I'd suggest headshunts on all yards, including the shuttle lines from the storage yard by the through station (bottom right of the plan), though that one could also use a runaround loop too. Unless, it's intended for DMU traffic, in which case maybe run the line closer to the station?!
We may well add in further headshunts as Paul progresses. Once all the track is laid and had lots of test operations, I'm sure there'll be tweaks to the track plan.
Hi Julian gone are the days of laying plain paper on the baseboard and marking on it templates from the rail manufactures (lol). Many thanks for sharing your hard work in making what I think are the right changes to the layout plan. Will this system calculate the number of points, crossovers and track required? Looking forward to the next update regards Barry..
Yes, the software does provide what is essentially a shopping list of all the track and points required. It also gives a total lineal length of the track used.
In road design, i seem to remember that spirals and ellipses are used to meet the tangent of the curve.
Looks like the software has a bug in it??
It is just the way the software calculates curves by default. There may be a preference setting to switch to constant radius curves but I haven't explored this.
Personally, I'm not a fan of controlling access to the engine shed roads by means of a turntable. If the turntable fails, you prevent egress for all the stored locomotives, until maintenance comes out to fix it(!). With point access, you might lose some roads when a point fails, but at least some locomotives will still be available.
Of course that's not to say, that it's a bad thing, if that's all you have room for on the plan.
Space is certainly a factor in this scenario, hence direct turntable access.
Thats very cool, does it calculate how many pieces of track were used, and scale or non scale length of the whole network ?, certainly gives me some confidence if I was going to have a go at design later on...cheers
Yes, the software does provide what is essentially a shopping list of all the track and points required. It also gives a total lineal length of track used which can then be scaled, in this case multiplying by 76 (OO scale) to give a real-world length.
Dear Julian, love the edit. Absolutely agree on the easement from a 4th radius. Just wondering if the settings of the easement can be changed in Rail Modeler Pro? Might it be the parameter for the smallest radius allowed? Love the different throats you’ve added, makes absolute sense.
On points or turnouts, I build my own. Hence, I sometimes deviate from connecting all the track, which gives the opportunity to further enhance the alignment of the point work. I do understand that isn’t really an option with set track. Cheerio
Thanks Vincent. There may well be a preference setting that can be changed in the software but I haven't explored this (yet). The idea with this layout is Paul will reuse the points from the previous layout, keeping costs down.
Are these changes in operation yet? I’d be interested to see how they work when they’re done.
We're a wee way off from an operational state, the baseboards/framing are yet to be built.
Ok can we get on with it now i think we are all tied of the planing we get it ! Little john from the UK
I think you're mostly speaking for yourself judging by all the other favourable comments.
@zodzod9378 I think you’ve missed the point. I found this quite interesting and informative. The changes have greatly improved the layout and I’m sure it will evolve further!
any rail has a limit on what you can build without paying for the program too still do not like this program to spend money on something i don't like
People spend time and money developing these products and deserve some reward.
Most software comes with free trial versions (limited in some way) so you can get a feel for the software and see if you like, or in your case, not like it.