Re: New setup, and loco advice?

Andy Hewitt wrote:
Welcome to the club!

There are plenty of knowledgable folk on this newsgroup who will be able
to help you if you get stuck. here are a few thought to start with.

> I plan to mount this on a permanent layout in a second shed I have,
> giving enough room for the Track Mat that came with it. I'm initially
> going to start off working to the Track Mat layout, concentrating on
> modelling detail, rather than worrying about the layout problems. Any
> tips for the Track Mat - I'm a bit wary of their advice to use PVa glue.

I'm sure most people here would advise you to consider devising your own
layout rather than going with the standard Trackmat. Half the fun is in
coming up with a configuration that has operating interest within the
space you have available. Also, if you are looking for realism, the
TrackMat layout has some serious compromises.

> I'm also thinking of points controls. Now I'm quite
> happy to keep things 'looking' more realistic, and I like the appearance
> of the manual points switches, that emulate the original levers. Any
> pointers (sorry) for those?

If you want your points electrically operated, the best way is to mount
the point motors under the board, so nothing is visible.

Most people seem to use enamels to paint locos. There are a couple of
ranges (RailMatch and Phoenix) which produce authentic paints for just
about every livery.

Hopefully, others will answer your other questions.

Adrian

Adrian <adrian_bradScrubThisBitshaw@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Andy Hewitt wrote:
> Welcome to the club!
>
> There are plenty of knowledgable folk on this newsgroup who will be able
> to help you if you get stuck. here are a few thought to start with.

Cheers.

> > I plan to mount this on a permanent layout in a second shed I have,
> > giving enough room for the Track Mat that came with it. I'm initially
> > going to start off working to the Track Mat layout, concentrating on
> > modelling detail, rather than worrying about the layout problems. Any
> > tips for the Track Mat - I'm a bit wary of their advice to use PVa glue.
>
> I'm sure most people here would advise you to consider devising your own
> layout rather than going with the standard Trackmat. Half the fun is in
> coming up with a configuration that has operating interest within the
> space you have available. Also, if you are looking for realism, the
> TrackMat layout has some serious compromises.

Ok, that is something I was considering, the TrackMat doesn't have the
worlds best graphics for sure, and there is, erm, rather a lack of
variety there too - I'm sure they could come up with more than one
layout from the pieces supplied in the Track Packs.

I'd certainly love to add a tunnel, and perhaps a bit of elevated track
too (that's for the future though).

My operating space happens to be exactly the same size as the TrackMat -
so I thought I'd just get a working setup going first. I do have
possibilities for some extra sidings in the future too.

> > I'm also thinking of points controls. Now I'm quite
> > happy to keep things 'looking' more realistic, and I like the appearance
> > of the manual points switches, that emulate the original levers. Any
> > pointers (sorry) for those?
>
> If you want your points electrically operated, the best way is to mount
> the point motors under the board, so nothing is visible.

OK, I've seen that on another setup, although I wouldn't mind a couple
of top mounted with huts jobs.

On the points motors, as long as the linkage works, do I have to stick
with the pucker motors, or can I go scavenging old ones off eBay?

> Most people seem to use enamels to paint locos. There are a couple of
> ranges (RailMatch and Phoenix) which produce authentic paints for just
> about every livery.

Righto, cheers.

> Hopefully, others will answer your other questions.

Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for
the input Adrian.

Regards.

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

In message <1i177nk.g0o7c713qrp7oN%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>
wildrover.andy@googlemail.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote:

> Adrian <adrian_bradScrubThisBitshaw@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Andy Hewitt wrote:
> > Welcome to the club!
> >
> > There are plenty of knowledgable folk on this newsgroup who will be able
> > to help you if you get stuck. here are a few thought to start with.
>
> Cheers.
>
> > > I plan to mount this on a permanent layout in a second shed I have,
> > > giving enough room for the Track Mat that came with it. I'm initially
> > > going to start off working to the Track Mat layout, concentrating on
> > > modelling detail, rather than worrying about the layout problems. Any
> > > tips for the Track Mat - I'm a bit wary of their advice to use PVa glue.
> >
> > I'm sure most people here would advise you to consider devising your own
> > layout rather than going with the standard Trackmat. Half the fun is in
> > coming up with a configuration that has operating interest within the
> > space you have available. Also, if you are looking for realism, the
> > TrackMat layout has some serious compromises.
>
> Ok, that is something I was considering, the TrackMat doesn't have the
> worlds best graphics for sure, and there is, erm, rather a lack of
> variety there too - I'm sure they could come up with more than one
> layout from the pieces supplied in the Track Packs.
>
> I'd certainly love to add a tunnel, and perhaps a bit of elevated track
> too (that's for the future though).
>
> My operating space happens to be exactly the same size as the TrackMat -
> so I thought I'd just get a working setup going first. I do have
> possibilities for some extra sidings in the future too.
>
> > > I'm also thinking of points controls. Now I'm quite
> > > happy to keep things 'looking' more realistic, and I like the appearance
> > > of the manual points switches, that emulate the original levers. Any
> > > pointers (sorry) for those?
> >
> > If you want your points electrically operated, the best way is to mount
> > the point motors under the board, so nothing is visible.
>
> OK, I've seen that on another setup, although I wouldn't mind a couple
> of top mounted with huts jobs.
>
> On the points motors, as long as the linkage works, do I have to stick
> with the pucker motors, or can I go scavenging old ones off eBay?
>
> > Most people seem to use enamels to paint locos. There are a couple of
> > ranges (RailMatch and Phoenix) which produce authentic paints for just
> > about every livery.
>
> Righto, cheers.
>
> > Hopefully, others will answer your other questions.
>
> Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for
> the input Adrian.
>
> Regards.
>

May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger.
I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that
has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which
goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line
at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired.
It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously
if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the
1st radius curves required to fit 3ft.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
I have become... comfortably numb

beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:

> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for
> > the input Adrian.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
>
> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger.
> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that
> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which
> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line
> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired.
> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously
> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the
> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft.

My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
another idea would be great.

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

In article <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>, Andy
Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> writes
>beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:
>
>> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for
>> > the input Adrian.
>> >
>> > Regards.
>> >
>>
>> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger.
>> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that
>> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which
>> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line
>> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired.
>> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously
>> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the
>> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft.
>
>My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
>another idea would be great.

If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by
C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in
later editions.
If you e-mail me I can scan in and send some suggestions though, as CJF
rightly maintained, by far the best of these work with a central
operating hole to maintain easy access to the rear edge.
(unless you have space all the way round the 6x4, in which case you have
room for broader curves and decent express trains, using the same
central operating area idea!)

--
Chris Brown, Emett fan. See http://www.picturetrail.com/emettplus

Chris Brown <chris@x-track.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>, Andy
> Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> writes
> >beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for
> >> > the input Adrian.
> >> >
> >> > Regards.
> >> >
> >>
> >> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger.
> >> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that
> >> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which
> >> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line
> >> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired.
> >> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously
> >> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the
> >> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft.
> >
> >My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
> >another idea would be great.
>
> If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by
> C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in
> later editions.

Righto, thanks, there's a couple of those going on eBay, so I'll see if
I can nab a copy cheap.

> If you e-mail me I can scan in and send some suggestions though, as CJF
> rightly maintained, by far the best of these work with a central
> operating hole to maintain easy access to the rear edge.
> (unless you have space all the way round the 6x4, in which case you have
> room for broader curves and decent express trains, using the same
> central operating area idea!)

No worries for me, I'm tall, and can actually reach to the other side of
the layout across the narrow dimension. I can see where it'd be a
problem for some though.

Thanks - and I'll email you if I have no luck with the book on eBay.

Cheers.

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

"Andy Hewitt" <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:1i17ghm.xul7zd1e7lz3mN%wildrover.andy@googlem ail.com...
> Chris Brown <chris@x-track.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>, Andy
>> Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> writes
>> >beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks
>> >> > for
>> >> > the input Adrian.
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger.
>> >> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that
>> >> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of
>> >> which
>> >> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line
>> >> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired.
>> >> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously
>> >> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the
>> >> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft.
>> >
>> >My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
>> >another idea would be great.
>>
>> If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by
>> C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in
>> later editions.
>
> Righto, thanks, there's a couple of those going on eBay, so I'll see if
> I can nab a copy cheap.
>
>> If you e-mail me I can scan in and send some suggestions though, as CJF
>> rightly maintained, by far the best of these work with a central
>> operating hole to maintain easy access to the rear edge.
>> (unless you have space all the way round the 6x4, in which case you have
>> room for broader curves and decent express trains, using the same
>> central operating area idea!)
>
> No worries for me, I'm tall, and can actually reach to the other side of
> the layout across the narrow dimension. I can see where it'd be a
> problem for some though.
>
> Thanks - and I'll email you if I have no luck with the book on eBay.
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
> Andy Hewitt
> <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

returning to actual track, give serious thought to replacing any Hornby
points with Peco. Its added cost but they are better built and much more
reliable. Still on track, consider flexitrac instead of adding track packs.
Much cheaper and as the name suggests are flexible. I prefer the Hornby ones
over Peco as the latter is much harder to flex.
Incidently Peco's catalogue is one of the best sources of info on track
geometry as well as definitions.

For info on transfers look at http://www.hmrs.org.uk/transfers/index.php.
They can be purchased from
http://www.mainlytrains.co.uk/acatalog/index.html who have one of the best
ranges of lots of model bits and pieces. Their prices are good and delivery
excellent.

Cheers,
Simon

"simon" wrote

> returning to actual track, give serious thought to replacing any Hornby
> points with Peco. Its added cost but they are better built and much more
> reliable. Still on track, consider flexitrac instead of adding track
> packs. Much cheaper and as the name suggests are flexible. I prefer the
> Hornby ones over Peco as the latter is much harder to flex.

Hmm, whilst agreeing with most of what you say there Simon, I would have to
disagree with the last point.

Over the last few years (really since production of Hornby track was moved
from Roco in Austria to China) the quality of Hornby flexi-track has
deteriorated to the point where the sleepers can sometimes just fall of the
rail. I'd avoid it, unless you're willing to spend ages trying to rethread
the sleeper strips onto the rail.

I've used Peco Streamline flexi-track since 1971 without any serious
problems, and find it flexes just the right amount to allow easy
track-laying.

Guess it's just a question of horses for courses. I sell both in my shop,
and sell roughly 10 lengths of Peco flexi-track to every one of Hornby,
although some customers are still happy to use the latter.

John.

In message <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>
wildrover.andy@googlemail.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote:

> beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:
>
> > > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for
> > > the input Adrian.
> > >
> > > Regards.
> > >
> >
> > May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger.
> > I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that
> > has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which
> > goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line
> > at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired.
> > It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously
> > if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the
> > 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft.
>
> My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
> another idea would be great.
>

ok - I'll upload it to

www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk/track.gif

this afternoon/evening.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
I have become... comfortably numb

beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:

> > My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
> > another idea would be great.
> >
>
> ok - I'll upload it to
>
> www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk/track.gif
>
> this afternoon/evening.

Cheers dude :-)

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

Andy Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> wrote:

> > If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by
> > C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in
> > later editions.
>
> Righto, thanks, there's a couple of those going on eBay, so I'll see if
> I can nab a copy cheap.

Yup, got a copy for £1.20.

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote:

> > My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please,
> > another idea would be great.
> >
>
> ok - I'll upload it to
>
> www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk/track.gif
>
> this afternoon/evening.

Thanks Richard, that looks like something I might go for, I like the
idea of expanding the layout upwards, and there's plenty of scope for
adding sidings in the centre of the lower level.

I can also add an extra bit of board on the lower right of the layout,
in an 'L' shape, where I could also bung my storage sidings.

Cheers.

--
Andy Hewitt
<http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

	#1
Adrian	Re: New setup, and loco advice? Andy Hewitt wrote: Welcome to the club! There are plenty of knowledgable folk on this newsgroup who will be able to help you if you get stuck. here are a few thought to start with. > I plan to mount this on a permanent layout in a second shed I have, > giving enough room for the Track Mat that came with it. I'm initially > going to start off working to the Track Mat layout, concentrating on > modelling detail, rather than worrying about the layout problems. Any > tips for the Track Mat - I'm a bit wary of their advice to use PVa glue. I'm sure most people here would advise you to consider devising your own layout rather than going with the standard Trackmat. Half the fun is in coming up with a configuration that has operating interest within the space you have available. Also, if you are looking for realism, the TrackMat layout has some serious compromises. > I'm also thinking of points controls. Now I'm quite > happy to keep things 'looking' more realistic, and I like the appearance > of the manual points switches, that emulate the original levers. Any > pointers (sorry) for those? If you want your points electrically operated, the best way is to mount the point motors under the board, so nothing is visible. Most people seem to use enamels to paint locos. There are a couple of ranges (RailMatch and Phoenix) which produce authentic paints for just about every livery. Hopefully, others will answer your other questions. Adrian

	#2
Andy Hewitt	Re: New setup, and loco advice? Adrian <adrian_bradScrubThisBitshaw@yahoo.com> wrote: > Andy Hewitt wrote: > Welcome to the club! > > There are plenty of knowledgable folk on this newsgroup who will be able > to help you if you get stuck. here are a few thought to start with. Cheers. > > I plan to mount this on a permanent layout in a second shed I have, > > giving enough room for the Track Mat that came with it. I'm initially > > going to start off working to the Track Mat layout, concentrating on > > modelling detail, rather than worrying about the layout problems. Any > > tips for the Track Mat - I'm a bit wary of their advice to use PVa glue. > > I'm sure most people here would advise you to consider devising your own > layout rather than going with the standard Trackmat. Half the fun is in > coming up with a configuration that has operating interest within the > space you have available. Also, if you are looking for realism, the > TrackMat layout has some serious compromises. Ok, that is something I was considering, the TrackMat doesn't have the worlds best graphics for sure, and there is, erm, rather a lack of variety there too - I'm sure they could come up with more than one layout from the pieces supplied in the Track Packs. I'd certainly love to add a tunnel, and perhaps a bit of elevated track too (that's for the future though). My operating space happens to be exactly the same size as the TrackMat - so I thought I'd just get a working setup going first. I do have possibilities for some extra sidings in the future too. > > I'm also thinking of points controls. Now I'm quite > > happy to keep things 'looking' more realistic, and I like the appearance > > of the manual points switches, that emulate the original levers. Any > > pointers (sorry) for those? > > If you want your points electrically operated, the best way is to mount > the point motors under the board, so nothing is visible. OK, I've seen that on another setup, although I wouldn't mind a couple of top mounted with huts jobs. On the points motors, as long as the linkage works, do I have to stick with the pucker motors, or can I go scavenging old ones off eBay? > Most people seem to use enamels to paint locos. There are a couple of > ranges (RailMatch and Phoenix) which produce authentic paints for just > about every livery. Righto, cheers. > Hopefully, others will answer your other questions. Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for the input Adrian. Regards. -- Andy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

	#3
beamendsltd	Re: New setup, and loco advice? In message <1i177nk.g0o7c713qrp7oN%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com> wildrover.andy@googlemail.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote: > Adrian <adrian_bradScrubThisBitshaw@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Andy Hewitt wrote: > > Welcome to the club! > > > > There are plenty of knowledgable folk on this newsgroup who will be able > > to help you if you get stuck. here are a few thought to start with. > > Cheers. > > > > I plan to mount this on a permanent layout in a second shed I have, > > > giving enough room for the Track Mat that came with it. I'm initially > > > going to start off working to the Track Mat layout, concentrating on > > > modelling detail, rather than worrying about the layout problems. Any > > > tips for the Track Mat - I'm a bit wary of their advice to use PVa glue. > > > > I'm sure most people here would advise you to consider devising your own > > layout rather than going with the standard Trackmat. Half the fun is in > > coming up with a configuration that has operating interest within the > > space you have available. Also, if you are looking for realism, the > > TrackMat layout has some serious compromises. > > Ok, that is something I was considering, the TrackMat doesn't have the > worlds best graphics for sure, and there is, erm, rather a lack of > variety there too - I'm sure they could come up with more than one > layout from the pieces supplied in the Track Packs. > > I'd certainly love to add a tunnel, and perhaps a bit of elevated track > too (that's for the future though). > > My operating space happens to be exactly the same size as the TrackMat - > so I thought I'd just get a working setup going first. I do have > possibilities for some extra sidings in the future too. > > > > I'm also thinking of points controls. Now I'm quite > > > happy to keep things 'looking' more realistic, and I like the appearance > > > of the manual points switches, that emulate the original levers. Any > > > pointers (sorry) for those? > > > > If you want your points electrically operated, the best way is to mount > > the point motors under the board, so nothing is visible. > > OK, I've seen that on another setup, although I wouldn't mind a couple > of top mounted with huts jobs. > > On the points motors, as long as the linkage works, do I have to stick > with the pucker motors, or can I go scavenging old ones off eBay? > > > Most people seem to use enamels to paint locos. There are a couple of > > ranges (RailMatch and Phoenix) which produce authentic paints for just > > about every livery. > > Righto, cheers. > > > Hopefully, others will answer your other questions. > > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for > the input Adrian. > > Regards. > May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger. I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired. It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft. Richard -- www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk I have become... comfortably numb

	#4
Andy Hewitt	Re: New setup, and loco advice? beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote: > > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for > > the input Adrian. > > > > Regards. > > > > May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger. > I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that > has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which > goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line > at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired. > It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously > if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the > 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft. My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please, another idea would be great. -- Andy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

	#5
Chris Brown	Re: New setup, and loco advice? In article <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>, Andy Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> writes >beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote: > >> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for >> > the input Adrian. >> > >> > Regards. >> > >> >> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger. >> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that >> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which >> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line >> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired. >> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously >> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the >> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft. > >My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please, >another idea would be great. If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in later editions. If you e-mail me I can scan in and send some suggestions though, as CJF rightly maintained, by far the best of these work with a central operating hole to maintain easy access to the rear edge. (unless you have space all the way round the 6x4, in which case you have room for broader curves and decent express trains, using the same central operating area idea!) -- Chris Brown, Emett fan. See http://www.picturetrail.com/emettplus

	#6
Andy Hewitt	Re: New setup, and loco advice? Chris Brown <chris@x-track.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In article <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>, Andy > Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> writes > >beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote: > > > >> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks for > >> > the input Adrian. > >> > > >> > Regards. > >> > > >> > >> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger. > >> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that > >> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of which > >> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line > >> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired. > >> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously > >> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the > >> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft. > > > >My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please, > >another idea would be great. > > If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by > C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in > later editions. Righto, thanks, there's a couple of those going on eBay, so I'll see if I can nab a copy cheap. > If you e-mail me I can scan in and send some suggestions though, as CJF > rightly maintained, by far the best of these work with a central > operating hole to maintain easy access to the rear edge. > (unless you have space all the way round the 6x4, in which case you have > room for broader curves and decent express trains, using the same > central operating area idea!) No worries for me, I'm tall, and can actually reach to the other side of the layout across the narrow dimension. I can see where it'd be a problem for some though. Thanks - and I'll email you if I have no luck with the book on eBay. Cheers. -- Andy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/>

	#7
simon	Re: New setup, and loco advice? "Andy Hewitt" <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> wrote in message news:1i17ghm.xul7zd1e7lz3mN%wildrover.andy@googlem ail.com... > Chris Brown <chris@x-track.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> In article <1i17b7l.15t0g19cktbl7N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com>, Andy >> Hewitt <wildrover.andy@googlemail.com> writes >> >beamendsltd <beamendsltd@btconnect.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > Well, it was as much a get my feet under the table as well. Thanks >> >> > for >> >> > the input Adrian. >> >> > >> >> > Regards. >> >> > >> >> >> >> May I ask what size area you have available - is if 6' x 3' or bigger. >> >> I ask as I have a drawing of the 6 x 3 layout I had in my youth that >> >> has two "circles" on different levels, connected by ramps, one of >> >> which >> >> goes through a tunnel giving the efffect of a double track main line >> >> at one side of the layout. Sidings can be in the middle as desired. >> >> It sounds like it matches your specification quite well. Obviously >> >> if you have more room it can be "spread out" to get rid of the >> >> 1st radius curves required to fit 3ft. >> > >> >My layout table is 6ft (plus a couple more inches) x 4ft, so yes please, >> >another idea would be great. >> >> If you have 6x4 then an old edition of "60 plans for small railways" by >> C J Freezer will give you lots of choice. 6x4 went out of favour in >> later editions. > > Righto, thanks, there's a couple of those going on eBay, so I'll see if > I can nab a copy cheap. > >> If you e-mail me I can scan in and send some suggestions though, as CJF >> rightly maintained, by far the best of these work with a central >> operating hole to maintain easy access to the rear edge. >> (unless you have space all the way round the 6x4, in which case you have >> room for broader curves and decent express trains, using the same >> central operating area idea!) > > No worries for me, I'm tall, and can actually reach to the other side of > the layout across the narrow dimension. I can see where it'd be a > problem for some though. > > Thanks - and I'll email you if I have no luck with the book on eBay. > > Cheers. > > -- > Andy Hewitt > <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> returning to actual track, give serious thought to replacing any Hornby points with Peco. Its added cost but they are better built and much more reliable. Still on track, consider flexitrac instead of adding track packs. Much cheaper and as the name suggests are flexible. I prefer the Hornby ones over Peco as the latter is much harder to flex. Incidently Peco's catalogue is one of the best sources of info on track geometry as well as definitions. For info on transfers look at http://www.hmrs.org.uk/transfers/index.php. They can be purchased from http://www.mainlytrains.co.uk/acatalog/index.html who have one of the best ranges of lots of model bits and pieces. Their prices are good and delivery excellent. Cheers, Simon

	#8
John Turner	Re: New setup, and loco advice? "simon" wrote > returning to actual track, give serious thought to replacing any Hornby > points with Peco. Its added cost but they are better built and much more > reliable. Still on track, consider flexitrac instead of adding track > packs. Much cheaper and as the name suggests are flexible. I prefer the > Hornby ones over Peco as the latter is much harder to flex. Hmm, whilst agreeing with most of what you say there Simon, I would have to disagree with the last point. Over the last few years (really since production of Hornby track was moved from Roco in Austria to China) the quality of Hornby flexi-track has deteriorated to the point where the sleepers can sometimes just fall of the rail. I'd avoid it, unless you're willing to spend ages trying to rethread the sleeper strips onto the rail. I've used Peco Streamline flexi-track since 1971 without any serious problems, and find it flexes just the right amount to allow easy track-laying. Guess it's just a question of horses for courses. I sell both in my shop, and sell roughly 10 lengths of Peco flexi-track to every one of Hornby, although some customers are still happy to use the latter. John.