Made a start at last...
- Thread starter DaveG
- Start date
Rhinochugger
Retired Oik
Why do you need to protect the decking planks? As they are treated timber, they're usually exposed to weather without further protection (when they're used for decking that is).
I appreciate that you need something to retain the ballast, but the felt may retain moisture between the felt and decking and actually encourage the timber to deteriorate.
Chris Vernell
45.29 N, 75.75 W
Fred Mills, who has built and runs an extensive (and excellent) garden railroad in the extremes of the East Ontario climate, does not use roofing felt for that reason, I believe.
I don't use it, either, after some unsatisfactory experiments. PT lumber and cedar are lasting quite well in my backyard without stain or felt covering.
DaveG
Registered
Thanks again to Rhinochugger and Chris for your comments and observations above.
I suppose the use of roof felt was to give a uniform covering to the somewhat tatty decking (which was recovered from previous use as actual decking) and to give a base to the ballasted section which gives the impression of something less organic and more mineral than the wood itself.
Interesting point about the felt trapping moisture - I had considered this but it is laid in long sheets and where there are edges, I have used some PVA for bonding but of course, holes are inevitable as I am screwing the track down but I hope that the sleepers will help prevent water ingress to an extent. Of course, we all know that water will find its way in anywhere it'snot wanted so I'll keep an eye on it and see if it looks to be causing problems.
One option is to take my Stanley knife to the felt and cut track width strips around the track now that it is laid and re-expose the timbers, and apply some other sort of covering,but ideally I do want to get away from the wood look in the station area where I can. However, I have quite a lot of platform area to add between the main and loop lines which will disguise a lot of it.
As long as the wood doesn't start to rot any time soon, I'll keep experimenting - as has been mentioned already, it's quite a learning curve for me as I am more used to 4mm scale railway building indoors!
I suppose the use of roof felt was to give a uniform covering to the somewhat tatty decking (which was recovered from previous use as actual decking) and to give a base to the ballasted section which gives the impression of something less organic and more mineral than the wood itself.
Interesting point about the felt trapping moisture - I had considered this but it is laid in long sheets and where there are edges, I have used some PVA for bonding but of course, holes are inevitable as I am screwing the track down but I hope that the sleepers will help prevent water ingress to an extent. Of course, we all know that water will find its way in anywhere it'snot wanted so I'll keep an eye on it and see if it looks to be causing problems.
One option is to take my Stanley knife to the felt and cut track width strips around the track now that it is laid and re-expose the timbers, and apply some other sort of covering,but ideally I do want to get away from the wood look in the station area where I can. However, I have quite a lot of platform area to add between the main and loop lines which will disguise a lot of it.
As long as the wood doesn't start to rot any time soon, I'll keep experimenting - as has been mentioned already, it's quite a learning curve for me as I am more used to 4mm scale railway building indoors!
DaveG
Registered
Thanks - I am pleased with progress and am also musing over the operation of the S&C.
I was in my local model shop in York on Thursday getting some curved track and was talking to the owner who is very knowledgeable and helpful and we were discussing operation and electrics and although I had said earlier I was going to look out for another Train Engineer 2, mainly because the cost of going DCC seemed too much to me, I was made aware of the fact that some basic chips are now really quite affordable, especially when compared with the cost of locos and stock, and 2nd hand base units are now quite reasonable in price. This got me thinking that even just splitting the network into 3 independent but connectable electrical sections would be quite a hassle, then creating suitable isolated sections for parking locos would add another layer of complexity that DCC would remove at a stroke.
So, my thought now is to keep 2 circuits but connected eventually via double pole double throw switches that can create one electrical circuit so I can then run DC on one line or DCC on all lines. (This is to also allow a future situation where I would like to host operating days and allow DC and DCC trains to operate simultaneously).
So, today's developments:
First picture shows the station developments which is now the almost complete layout but on playing around a bit today with some rolling stock, I think I need another dead end siding or 2 as well as my through sidings. I think it will probably be a right hand point from the side of the station building and extending towards the goods shed. Since previous pictures, I've now put the 3 main running lines further apart to provide more room for passengers between trains.
The tracks in the picture from right to left are:
Far end with buffer stop by the crossing keeper's cottage - Branch line which will run down the side of the fence possibly on a rising gradient so that it ends up by the back door to the garage which is down the passage
Middle track is a bi-directional main line which will run in parallel with the other bi-directional main line where they have to run close together so I can build steps from the doors in the living room (at the back of the house) and the kitchen onto a yet to be built patio area.
The 2nd picture shows the other junction where the 2 main lines will split around the shed, with the line in front of the shed will stay at a lower level while the other line will start to gently climb behind the shed and run around the perimeter of the garden at a higher level, and will use that bridge in the photo which I put out just to see a train on it although it won't be on the low level line (unless I buy another one!).
The "high level" line won't be very high as it needs to get back down to ground level at the back of the house again but I think the separation will add to the operational interest. Also, both lines will have small stations with passing loops (I have 3 of the 4 larger radius points for these loops already bought in preparation) on the other side of the garden to provide further operational options. Got to be DCC with this sort of layout really hasn't it?
DaveG
Registered
Going back to an earlier discussion, a bit of recent rain provided an example of the possible risk of using roofing felt as the "underlay" for the ballast - however, the sleepers are deeper than the water and it did dry off very quickly. The picture above is before I decided to push the running lines further apart to make more space for low height platforms.
In the next picture, we see a gradient test. I thought I'd try the longest train that would fit in the loops - this combination didn't make it! Slipped on the gradient approaching the curve so easier gradient or shorter trains required. Double heading the U-class (I have 3 in total) solved the problem so that's another possibility.
DaveG
Registered
This suggests to me why I need an additional siding by the goods shed. The green mail coach is sitting on what will be the branch down the passage to the garage in future. At the moment it is a useful if short siding but once in use as a running line, I think an extra siding will be very useful.
A point by the 3 way would give you another or possibly 2 usefully long siding and with better access as well being at the front, unless you have another use for that bare deck site. Also you could site the Goods Shed by the 5th rear loop next to the Station Building, Continental practice frequently used the loop nearest to the Station as a Goods Road.
With regard to decking and timber in general. Problems can occur when it sits in locations where wet. This is just as applicable to Wood Decking or even Tanalised Timber. Sadly this will be you with a near Ground Level Line, my friend who was adamant that he wanted a ground Level line used Filcris Deck Planks with great success except for the well known Expansion/Contraction issues that I believe to be more of a problem with his 0 gauge layout than our G size. However the use of Felt is sound and if you put in some Mastic when Screws are fitted you should help seal any holes. Plus your line is a little bit raised so fingers crossed. I do worry a little about the pudding you had, not so much of a problem at this time of the year but in Yorks Winters with the 1700 monsoon (well it always happened at that time when I worked in York and was preparing to dash to the Station for my Selby Train) could give you issues. Again you just need to hope, but puddling water will find a way as is found by many with houses that have flat roofs. I have lots of Timber both Deck and WICKS Tanalised Gravel Boards. Some of this goes back to around 1994 and was recovered from a friends Garden when he moved on and left Garden Railways behind him. He is back now but that is another story. Said Gravel Board was made into a U section with Felt in top, but has always been more than 1 foot above ground in Sticks of varying types. In my Garden now it sits 3-4 feet high and is in excellent preservation. With new Felt fitted some 4 years ago when laid out in the Garden again.
Good luck with your project, I hope that I have not disheartened you too much.
JonD
Last edited:
DaveG
Registered
Thanks Jon
You have raised some interesting points and obviously, a shed roof with felt naturally drains but I strived to make the board as level as possible in both planes which does of course mean, no clear drainage route. All of the boards are supported on quite substantial timbers which are in turn sitting on brick pillars clear of the ground so even with heavy rainfall, there should be no risk of the wood sitting in pools of water and the garden does drain quite quickly as it's very sandy here.
Certainly, the pooling is a concern but I suppose I shall just keep an eye on things and if i detect any obvious softening of things in due course I will need to lift the track and consider replacing the base with better quality more weatherproof timber. At the moment, as I still need a LOT of track to get me round the garden, I think I'll wait for that additional expenditure when the time comes.
I was tempted to have the line higher and it would be oh so much easier on my creaking knees but I want to try to blend the line in amongst flower beds in due course when I get to that stage and also, I didn't want it to dominate too much but again, as I get older, never say never and who knows, if I do have to rebuild due to failed decking, then perhaps I will raise the line although of course, I am a bit constrained by 2 doorways into the garden from the back of the house. Gradient tests show that even modest length trains can only handle fairly gentle gradients and I am not looking to convert to a rack railway if I can avoid it!
Ralphmp
Registered
One of the things I would do differently if starting my layout again is to raise the track slightly from the supporting boards it sits on; e.g. using "ballast" of some description. Whilst I deliberately avoided doing this when I built my layout - it didn't fit in with how i wanted my raiway to look - it would have helped reduce the irritation caused by rain showers, when water puddles between the sleepers and has to be manually mopped up before i can turnthe power on.
Now I have a bit more time available, one of my ongoing projects is experimenting with elevating the track slightly in the worst affected areas to combat puddling - e.g. fitting spacers underneath, retrolaying(?!) some kind of ballast. Hopefully this will reduce the problem to a manageable level.
Now I have a bit more time available, one of my ongoing projects is experimenting with elevating the track slightly in the worst affected areas to combat puddling - e.g. fitting spacers underneath, retrolaying(?!) some kind of ballast. Hopefully this will reduce the problem to a manageable level.
DaveG
Registered
And with regard to the track layout, sorry, i forgot to mention that, the idea of the station and goods shed sharing a road is a good one - so after a bit of a hunt about, I found this photo of a station on the Ybbsthalbahn - that matches precisely what you mentioned! The station building even has an air of the Piko model.
Here is a couple of pics another example for you at the Bai de Somme preserved Railway in France, one of many more examples of this configuration in Europe. The Track plan here is 3 loops, one with the Goods Shed as shown.
The 3rd Rail at the edge of the second pic is the Platform edge, not a rail for mixed gauge that does exist in places on this line. Though not on this Branch of the line.
JonD
Zerogee
Clencher's Bogleman
The station layout in the pic is interesting, but the green loco even more so - would I be right in thinking that it looks like the front end of a class 2091 with the rear section chopped off......?
Jon.
MTheStrong
Registered
Hi Jon,
Please have a look at this link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:ÖBB_2190 and this one: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBÖ_2040/s
Regards
Martin
MTheStrong
Registered
Hi Jon,
Both loco types were made by the same manufacturer - Simmering in Vienna. So I would not be at all surprised at the family likeness.
Martin
I see an LGB bash comming on from someone,
JonD
Zerogee
Clencher's Bogleman
It's a nice idea - but it would be pretty costly in terms of donor locos, you'd have to cut up a 2091, add an 0-4-0 diesel chassis, and either scratchbuild a new cab or find something similar.... to me the cab looks at bit like that on the TL45 V3 Deutz....?
Jon.
DaveG
Registered
Following on from the ideas about the goods shed location, I have now completed the kit, and positioned (but not yet fixed) it alongside the station building as suggested. This now gives room for a useful additional siding.
I was trying out a relatively low cost point operating technique today when it became apparent that I had a live frog in the track layout!
So that'll be a hopper by the hopper!
I was trying out a relatively low cost point operating technique today when it became apparent that I had a live frog in the track layout!
So that'll be a hopper by the hopper!