Beginners OO 1950's Banff

[John Duffy]

The choice between sector plate and traverser is down to a few factors;
Location, entry point, build complexity and practicality.

A swinging sector plate is (I would suggest) an easier build overall and can work well with a limited number of roads facing a single, square on entry point. The main downside is that the farther from the centre line of your swing plate you have tracks the more the point of entry has to curve. In OO this is probably not too big an issue but worth considering.

If you are building this as your primary project in a permanent location then I would consider the additional build requirements as being a long term investment and consider the traverser. It means that each entry road is exactly the same. It is also easier to have a fixed end plate which allows for locos to “run round” their stock without being handled. This might be useful for you as the branch loco will work in and out regularly.

Traversers are also well suited to motorising or automating if that is something you might look to add.

One consideration - for either option - is if possible avoid having the entry point and the board joint in the same location. (From experience - it just makes alignment harder).

I had planned to build traversers but the overhang at the sides was a factor for me as I am limited there space wise. I used swinging sector plates as temporary yards and typically for me, have never replaced them.

I do think that either option is preferable to the fan of points as there is no wasted space.

John

 

[aardvark]

The choice between sector plate and traverser is down to a few factors;
Location, entry point, build complexity and practicality.

A swinging sector plate is (I would suggest) an easier build overall and can work well with a limited number of roads facing a single, square on entry point. The main downside is that the farther from the centre line of your swing plate you have tracks the more the point of entry has to curve. In OO this is probably not too big an issue but worth considering.

If you are building this as your primary project in a permanent location then I would consider the additional build requirements as being a long term investment and consider the traverser. It means that each entry road is exactly the same. It is also easier to have a fixed end plate which allows for locos to “run round” their stock without being handled. This might be useful for you as the branch loco will work in and out regularly.

Traversers are also well suited to motorising or automating if that is something you might look to add.

One consideration - for either option - is if possible avoid having the entry point and the board joint in the same location. (From experience - it just makes alignment harder).

I had planned to build traversers but the overhang at the sides was a factor for me as I am limited there space wise. I used swinging sector plates as temporary yards and typically for me, have never replaced them.

I do think that either option is preferable to the fan of points as there is no wasted space.

John

Thank you John: your contribution is simply outstanding. You've answered several questions that I was beginning to think of asking!

The only thing I wish to add is one of C.J. Freezer's plans from 60 Plans for Small Railways, 4th edition (perhaps 1990), featuring a traverser.



In this case, the traverser is a through fiddleyard, with fixed storage to both the left and right of the 5-track traverser: it looks like loco storage to the left and train storage to the right. I would expect to construct the transverser along with both the fixed end sections as a single unit, as you recommend.

Most traversers that I've seen on-line and and the one that I've seen in real life seem to operate as drive-on/drive-off storage, whereas adding the fixed storage makes the traverser look like a 5-way double slip.

Now, whether I would need all that fiddleyard space for my diminutive layout is a valid question, but I think that it's much easier to start small and add additional tracks as needed to either traverser or sector plate than it is to extend a fan-of-turnouts fiddleyard.

I also like that the traverser doesn't extend beyond the baseboard when moved in either direction.

cheers

 

[aardvark]

In case anyone is following along, Model Rail #247 May 2018 includes an article on the construction of a traverser. I do like the idea of having ply on the bottom fixed section to strengthen the frame, but I'm less sure about using door bolts for track alignment, which I think would have too much slop, at least for OO.



For modellers of a different persuasion, the same issue has articles on construction of a sector plate and of cassettes.

Other leading model railway magazines probably have similar articles, but I haven't found those yet.