Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,614 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have this crazy idea of taking the minories trackplan (or something similar) and making it as complicated as possible with overlapping turnouts and other fancy stuff.

I have been looking at templot and wondering weather to take the plunge.

have any of you used it?

Peter
 

·
Just another modeller
Joined
·
9,983 Posts
*** Hello Peter

It was used to plan my huge ribblehead layout, creating Settle, Craven Lime co trackage, Ribblehead and Blea Moor all as they were in the early part of last century... using the Midland Land Plans and OS maps as references.

After a few frustrated days I worked my way through several of Martins vdeo tutorials and it clicked... I haven't looked back and now use it often, I have also been putting many friends onto it and all are also delighted with their purchase.

Its a great programme and is really well supported by Martin and the Templot forum. Take the plunge, you will not regret it.

Richard
 

·
Dogsbody
Joined
·
1,387 Posts
Hi Peter

My next 'project' will be a derivitive of Minories (once I've finished off a couple of modules for the club).

Don't you think that complicating it will spoil the essence ?

I'm going to try a shorter length but greater width by using Peco set track points. My stock is first generation diesels so everything has all axle pick up. I just hope the gronk will not stutter !

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 22 Feb 2009, 04:38) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>After a few frustrated days I worked my way through several of Martins vdeo tutorials and it clicked...

Listen to Richard! He told me this last week ... And do you know what? ... The penny is beginning to drop!


I have had a play and I think that I am getting there it certainly feels like a quite powerful software with large potential once you get over the seemingly strange foibles.


Oooh! Also, make sure that you upgrade to the latest version! I found this to be my key. For after I did - I found the whole thing simpler - Not sure why though.


I would suggest that you persist.

Best regards

Ian
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,857 Posts
QUOTE Don't you think that complicating it will spoil the essence ?

It might spoil the essence of Minories but it would be more typical of a city terminus squeezed into a confined space. Leeds Central for example has two scissors crossings between the main running lines where each has one "corner" as a single slip onto a third line. A little further out there's further complex trackwork where the LNWR lines cross the GNR lines to gain access to the ex L&Y high level goods and just beyond that again is the tight curve down to Geldard junction. All this in the space of about a quarter mile. Virtually the whole thing (except the L&Y shed) can be modelled in a 30 inch width.

David
 

·
Dogsbody
Joined
·
1,387 Posts
Hi David

That description does sound interesting.

Crossovers and double slips sounds a bit daunting. I've only experienced a few layouts with them and trouble seems to come with almost every one of them but I don't know why. Must admit they look great though !

Space will force me to stick more to "Minories" but I am thinking of making it emerge as a single line branch if and when I extend beyond. Only one extra "Y" point needed !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
QUOTE Crossovers and double slips sounds a bit daunting.

folowing on from Iain Rice's advice......slips and ''complicated'' P&C work are, in reality, quite simple....ie point sections, acute crossings and obtuse corssings....once these are assembled [as one does with an ordinary turnout]..then its a case of, bits of rail to connect them up?

The problems really occur when one compares the various gauges for 4mm scale.

It is actually more difficult to build track from scratch, in 16.5mm gauge [OO], than it is with EM or P4.....less room to play with.

so I've been told.....................................

So...Minories, with a traverser...??
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,857 Posts
QUOTE It is actually more difficult to build track from scratch, in 16.5mm gauge [OO], than it is with EM or P4.....less room to play with.
That's an interesting statement. If my attempts at chassis building work out ok, I might contemplate a switch to EM or P4.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
again...using EM or P4 makes life much easier with regards to steam loco chassis.......disregarding clearance issues twixt cranks, con rods and crankpins, behind outside cylinders.......EM/P4 allows correct relationships between wheels and splashers, for example.....a compromise with OO.

Also, within the chassis itself, EM/P4 chassis widths allow more room for motors and gearboxes.....not forgetting compensation or suspension.......I once decided to emulate a scratch built loco seen n a mag..a lotta years ago now....it originally was in EM, but I used OO....foundered upon the fact that for OO gauge, the motor had to be positioned above the chassis......whereas with EM it was positioned lower down, almost between the chassis sides.....gave the whole exercise a different complexion!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
Peter i use Templot & although it does take a while to get used to the program is brilliant. I wouldnt reccomend it if you are just maknig a layout with peco track because the program is more for template making & scale track design. Dont be put off though it is worth the money & a great thing to use & once you get the hang of it you,ll find it a bit addictive.

Thanks

Alberta.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,614 Posts
i was only picking minories as an example. although i do think we have a lack of good modern trackplans that take account of the new technologies we have available to us.

I would never go back to using Peco on a scenic section. i have nothing against their products, i am just bored with them.

I would stick with 16.5mm as allot of my stock os not of UK origin ant also at some stage i fancy having a go at russian broad gauge on EM or P4 chassis.

My current test track needs allot of work. i had thought about ballasting it but its so muc more than that. it also needs some attention to the track and the whole control syste needs an overhaul. it was designed to test DMU models with 1 or 2 tenshodo spuds and the controller cant cope with some of my kit built loco's or the japanese brass. i think its had its day.

I fancy doing smething didcot style on a fairly large plank. i am not going to have space to run trains but i do want to show off my loco's. and i would love to have a go at some posh trackwork.

Peter
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top