North London Layout Planning

[Noel]

Your traverser looks a challenge. With the strange track shape, can you really make a stack of them all identical so they all line up perfectly every time and despite seasonal movement of your timber baseboards.

There are other potential problems - the vertical FY will need a framework within which to move, and that frame has to be rigid or things will jam or not align properly. The challenge of seasonal movement will be relevant to a wood framework as well. Also relevant is the risk of unseasoned wood [which most/all cheaply available modern wood is] warping over time. An all metal FY and framework, apart from the FY surface, might be an option, although it won't prevent the movement of adjoining baseboards. Whatever the materials used, the more levels there are, the heavier the FY will be; so it is a reasonable assumption, I think, that you will need some sort of mechanism to raise and lower the FY, and a means of locking it at each level, to maintain vertical as well as horizontal alignment. The design of the framework may limit the possible locations of the tracks at the ends of the FY.

[garethashenden]

After heading towards a logical solution you seem to have suddenly dumped that and started again. I would have expected the final shape to be remarkably like the plan by Barhand - you were nearly there. The only useful part of the circuit is the large radius bit between the corners as pointwork can be placed there and even on the inside. You've chopped it into little bits and spread it around so none of the bits is likely to be useful and you'll always be shunting round a tight bend. There's also an ominous little cross to the left of the others which suggests there's a bit at 2ft 9in radius somewhere.

Your traverser looks a challenge. With the strange track shape, can you really make a stack of them all identical so they all line up perfectly every time and despite seasonal movement of your timber baseboards. Anyway, I would question the rationale of curved cassettes/whatever - if a train departs west, isn't the function of the off-stage arrangements to turn it round so that it can arrive from the west later in the day? Putting track closer to the left and right walls would seem essential and give a longer straight bit but I doubt you could go from curved approach to straight traverser successfully.

I think your idea for a dummy junction would just emphasise how sharp the curves are. It certainly wouldn't use any normal mainline s & c arrangements. The 11ft room length is proving a real challenge for a continuous run with your traverser.

DaveB

The cross on the left is the center for the curves on the bottom right. The minimum radius is still 42". I'm just doing what was suggested in adapting John's oval to David's triangle. Its not a perfect copy, and maybe it could be better, but its not as terrible as you seem to think.

I don't think the exact same train needs to go one way and then return the other. One up passenger train and one down passenger train should be sufficient for most operations. There is no variety in coaches and only limited variety in locomotives. I think a total of three or four trains in each direction would be sufficient to keep me occupied. It could probably keep three or so people occupied as well.

[barhamd]

I thought I'd just add a couple of thoughts to explain how I designed the original 'Empire Basin' plan and comment on the vertical fiddleyard as I actually built one and had it working.

The idea I used when laying out the plan was that I needed a straight section for the fiddle yard and a minimum radius of 40". So I started by putting a straight line for the fiddle yard in the middle of the longest wall, the length set by the minimum radius curve at either end. So I could just get in a 36" straight section and two 42" (diameter of the outside of a double track line) and a couple of inches to spare in my 10'6 room.

On the opposite side of the room I didn't need a straight section so laid out a slightly more gentle curve and played about with transition curves from the previously defined two curves. I was able to get the crossover to be a smooth transition from the radius of the inner to the out track avoiding any reverse curve. Building the single slip on the curve was 'entertaining' but not impossible. In the end I was able to reverse a train over the crossover from the mainline into the sidings without it falling off. Prior to abandoning the layout because the larger room became available I did modify the layout and place a yard inside the curve replacing the low level section. I was never really happy with the wagon lift to get a short train onto the lower level. I tried building a steeply inclined track on a curve to provide a 'zig-zag' but this had the usual problems of steep gradient/sharp curves/Alex Jackson couplings/being hidden so you could get to it.

On the fiddle-yard, I started off with a sheet of 9mm ? MDF which was secured to a pair of drawer runners from a 19" rack mount computer. These were screwed to the wall. I ran a cable up and over a pair of pulleys to a second sheet of MDF which ran between the drawer runners as a counter balance. To this base I then added shelves of 6mm MDF each of which had a pair of tracks. Alignment was via a substantial bolt which took the weight and then some smaller bolts with completed the alignment. This at least worked as a 'proof of concept' and I eventually replaced the MDF version with one made from aluminum section which was slightly lighter and more rigid.

The main problems with the concept was that it was not possible to balance the counter-weight to allow for the weight of the stock. Two complete trains could represent enough weight that either the fiddle yard was too heavy when the trains were in the fiddleyard or too light when they had gone onto the layout and the tracks in the fiddleyard were empty. It worked but was more effort than I wanted to move. I certainly wouldn't have been able to automate it.

I was faced with a similar space limit in terms of width when constructing Clare and rather than repeat the vertical fiddleyard I opted for a cassette system.

I wouldn't give up on getting a continuous run into the space you have available. The limitations can be worked around and you just have to cut your cloth to fit what you have. I enjoyed (which is the whole point in my view) having a couple of trains going round and round and occasional shunting one into the loop siding. The idea of then being able to shunt some wagons down the the lower level was good, my execution was lacking but it could have been made to work.

Keep going with the planning and good luck!

David