Recklin - a new small oval.

[Ian Jopson]

After a long liaison with 0-16.5 I am returning to 009 on a trial basis for a number of reasons. First, although 7mm gives body and heft I can't fit what I want into the space I have; and second, I am now retired with my wife due to do so in five years time. Already she is muttering about the dreaded 'downsizing' so my space may be even more curtailed. Progress on my 7mm Boston and Frieston Shore Tramway has stalled and recently our little group (Norfolk and Suffolk Narrow Gauge Modeller) of which I am a non-active member, passed on information of Needham Market MRC having a competition for there anniversary show next year. This is to be a layout of 3ft x 2ft.

As it happens, I have a couple of spare base frame 3ft x 1ft, and these have now been joined together to form one board, and covered in 9mm ply. I have picked out a layout plan from one of the Peco booklets which is for a 6 x 4 00 layout, and adapted this.

As the offered scenic provisions no longer fit I plan to have a road running from the bottom left up to disappear behind the church at the top of the hill. This I've sketched out with a few simple wargame buildings from my stash. Now I'm waiting for the track and points to arrive. Also, as the majority of my old 009 stuff was sold off years ago the Society sales dept. will be in regular use.

The lines back story will evolve in future posts, and I look forward to comments, suggestions and criticism.

PS. Recklin - Lincolnshire dialect for the smallest piglet in the litter.
PPS. Apologies for the poor photo, I must watch the light in future.

[Hobby]

One of CJF's by the look of it, he did some nice small scenic layouts like that one! One observation I'd make is that you will be very limited with the amount of stock you can run. I'd suggest a point in the tunnel leading back to a small fiddle yard round the back, it only needs to be 3 or 4 inches wide to get two or three roads on it.

[Ian Jopson]

Yes, it has its limitations. Small locos and 4-wheel stock seemed called for. I am considering a loop at the back, under the scenery, to allow some variety.

[B.Meldon]

Not all 009 four wheel stock is good with tight curves.
It is not the wheelbase but the coupling overhang that causes the problems.

Brian Meldon

[Hobby]

I recon you'll be ok with 9" curves on that layout Brian so it should be ok. With regard to the "fiddle yard" rather than try and fit a loop in I was thinking more of a fan of sidings tacked on the back, Ian. It'll mean you will have to run round your trains in the station to reverse direction but that will add to the variety!

[jimowers]

Not all 009 four wheel stock is good with tight curves.
It is not the wheelbase but the coupling overhang that causes the problems.

Brian Meldon

I agree with Brian. However, my latest actually uses 4 inch curves but only with locos and wagons that I tested to work on that radius.

The new Minitrains track has a radius of 5.5 inches and it looks as though that is a good compromise for small layouts such as the ones we tend to build. Their site states though" "Please be aware that the small radius allows only to run shorter locomotives on it. Our Heeresfeldbahn 0-8-0 locos run  on it, but the attached coaches will be pulled off the track. For the larger locos the best is to use the PECO track." Given that there are plenty of 4 wheel locos, both steam and diesel, and smaller size coaches like the Glyn Valley ones then a layout would still be possible with this track in a space no more than 11-12 inches deep if you decide to keep scenery to a minimum.

I actually have an L-shaped test board with track of different radii from 9 inches down to 3 inches so that I can test locos with different combinations of rolling stock before I build. I have found though that you need to run at least two wagons/coaches behind a loco to ensure that there are no derailments. It is often the couplings that cause the most problems.