My interpretation of the rules says that is completely legal and above board...if not just a little bit inspired!

As the "part TMO" on the rules, and with the hindsight of a video replay, AF's interpretation is correct Steve - you can align the maximum four (4) box files in any configuration you want, as long as the other design elements are not compromised; plus don't forget the ability to add a 'fifth columnist" by way of a 5th box to accommodate a cassette or fiddle yard if needed to make the design fully operational.

But wouldnt that then make it 5 boxes and outside the rules???

The line you are looking for is "If desired, a storage cassette can be added to one end to aid

operations – the cassette can be no longer than 368mm, nor wider than 264mm, and

preferably should be smaller than an A4 box file."

so you can't add a 5th boxfile.

Steve seems to be thinking along lines I went down 2 weeks ago just to see what you could do with them. the minimum adius requirement is the real restriction.

which indicates that you have an advantage of at least 2 weeks for this competition, hmmm... ? 

Well clarified MD - the real point of this competition is to encourage people to design (& hopefully build) a real NZ120 operating layout, [within the stated parameters of a maximum of FOUR  A4 sized box files, plus a storage cassette/fiddle yard (which can be no larger than an A4 size footprint)]- not to get involved in debate about what the "rules" may mean - that just takes all our time away from the design/build facet of the idea behind the announcement. Besides, they are "OUR" rules, and like any such, common sense can (& will) be applied to them by the sponsors. 

Question 1: Is there a maximum height for stuff other than the mainline, such as mountains/buildings etc?

Question 2: Must the boxes be used in their 'factory' configurations or can we cut them up to suit, provided we do not exceed the total area of 4 boxes? For example:

Or:

CC, so something like this would be "legal" as well... ?

gone, sorry

Hmm, I think its probably pushing things a bit.

My thoughts would be that while technically legal, the entries might be marked down for not quite being in the 'spirit' of the competition, which afterall is to build a layout in or on a box file.

height is not limited.

Steven I had 2 weeks, but this was simply to toss ideas round to see what would fit and what wouldn't, and see if the idea was workable from when Wee Duggie first suggested it to me.

From what I've seen already, I think that it is.

A tacit suggestion guys - stop giving all your design idea secrets away and just get on and design/build the thing - there are only five & a half months left - as a basic guideline, don't design anything that can't be fitted within the MAXIMUM dimension rule of FOUR BOXES -  after all the whole fundamental idea is that the design/layout can be simply transported to places/shows etc in the A4 box (es).

Given the AB's need THREE people to get the maximum effort from them, for the purposes of the NZ120 A4 Box file Layout Design/Build Competition, the sponsors have decided that this would also be a most suitable number for the judging panel (rather than C Northcote Parkinson's "ideal" committee number of seven).

It is with considerable pleasure that the sponsors announce the appointment of the first of these judges - NZ120's "enfant terrible", MD Esq. himself - Rhys Batchelor.

This gentleman's qualifications are well known to the NZ120 fraternity, and as there will be two other judges involved in the final deliberations, plus the sponsors, then NO possibility of a potential "conflict of interest", should he submit entries, is deemed to exist.

Approaches are being made to several other rail modelling notables, both onshore and offshore, and announcements of the other two judges for the panel will be made in due course.    

no problem mate, was just a bit teasing, and now that I know that you are one of the judges, do you like Swiss Chocolate... ?

The lady of the house is quite partial to it....

Bias!  Bias!  I demand a recount!!

Requests for recounts will be treated as an automatic "yellow card" offence on the requestee; a second request will result in issuance of a "red card"  and mandatory exclusion from the competition arena. 

Regarding interconnection of units: just wing it on the day with duct tape (if such a day occurs)? Or something more substantial? Is that level of complexity outside the spirit of the endeavour?

Ironic that with this competition we acutally have to think 'inside the box'...

SO is the competition just the plans  or does it have to be built. If it has to be built do we build it in  the Foolscape boxes.

About the 100mm from the front for the mainline... Is that the center line of the track, the inside edge or the outside edge?

Comments re posts #17 & #18:

for RKBL - the competition allows for one just to submit a design - but the real fun would be to convert your design into an operational mini-layout, which should fit into the number of Eastlight boxes you choose (up to a maximum of 4)

for Mike -the 100mm from layout front edge is to be measured as for the NZ120 Freemo layout design standard. 

Sorry I didn't word my question to well. What I meant to say is when you measure from the front edge, does the 100mm go to the mainline track centre, the outside edge of the closest rail to the front edge or the inside edge of the closest rail to the front edge? I don't want my track to be a few mils out when / if we put the modules together.

Mike, it's the track centre

I'd hardly describe myself as an 'enfant terrble', however I think it as an accurate description for the scale as a whole, seeing how it has attracted more than its fair share of rabble rousers and vaigrants

Yet another question for the respectable gentle-folk of the board:

Consider this sentence in the competition description:

And yes I promise not to go slashing boxes into peculiar shapes.

Good point - The intent of the competition remains for modellers to create designs (and hopefully construct layouts) which are recognisable as being located in New Zealand - given the wide variety of environments and construction methods employed in 1:1 scale railways all over NZ, it is absolutely within the orbit of this competition for enterprising modellers to seek inspiration in bush tramways, industrial lines (coal/gold/processing), wharf lines, county council lines etc etc - feel free to go for it, with the only proviso remaining that it at least look like a railway which would/did operate in NZ.

The reference to" based on NZR design principles" is intended to provide general guidance to designers/builders as to parameters to consider for such things curve radius, rail size, point types, sleeper sizes, tunnel clearances, main/secondary line spacings, rail building types/locations ; as the NZR design principles evolved over the 130 odd years, from broad gauge provincial, via PWD construction styles to concrete sleepered, continuous-welded rail, they are also for general guidance as well.

By all means design a bush tram, colliery line, limeworks siding, freezing works yard, city MU scene, etc - as long as it "looks like it is in NZ" the judges will be happy (oh, and it all fits within the main competition size constraint).  

Thank you for clearing that up.

Ignore box. theres no totally delete comment icon anywhere 

Great idea. And, all fired up after attending last weekends Trainz 10 event, I'm in.

Whoa, Nellie!!! Just did an online search and these Eastlight File Boxes are $24 a pop (at the cheapest)!!! And they have a nasty springclip (which is a right royal bugga to remove).

Looks like I'll be constructing a standalone "module" that can sit on a File Box. Could someone please advise on the interior dimensions of said Box File (I'm assuming I need to shave 4mm off the length and width and 2mm off the height? ... that, after referencing the stockboard thickness (2mm) of an old EastLight foolscap folder we have lying around). TIA.

Regards,

Dorian

Hi Dorian, what are you talking about... ? why would you buy a File Box ? do I miss something ? I did understand the module has to be not bigger than 368mm x 264mm x 75 mm. do we really have to build it so it will fit into one of these boxes ? - (that was only theoretically I hope ?) I am very confused right now... (I guess you did missunderstand me ? - no, no, I do missunderstand you very well !)

G'day Steve,

This, from the published "rules":

My reading of the above suggests: it can either be built in situ in said Box File(s), built seperately to fit into said File Box(s) or built as a standalone to sit on top of said Box File(s) (that's the footprint part). 

Hence my query as to interior box dimensions. I wish to follow the second choice (this way allows easier access to wiring, yada, yada, yada) but have to put off buying a box file until nearer the time the competition closes.

Clear as mud?

Regards,

Dorian

sorry my ignorance but I am really confused now... (Doh !)

I know, I may start splitting hair here but Dorian's post made me reading the rules and several of the answers again. the size of A4 is 297mm x 210mm - so how big can the cassette be ? no larger than A4 size footprint (297mm x 210mm) or no larger than 368mm x 264mm ?

do I not see the forest because of all the trees here or what ? how will that fit into one of the above mentioned boxes then ?

Okay, sticking my nose in ... again,

The published "rules" allow for a cassette/fiddle yard to be preferably no larger than an A4 footprint, but it can be as large as 368x264mm (hence the fifth columnist comments, above). I say, go with what is officially published.         

As for height: well, I'd say anything within reason, meself. Personally, I would have limited this and, as such will be limiting myself to it being the height of the open lid standing perpindicular to the box file (264mm).

Anyway, that's my take on things. It is a micro-layout box file challenge, afterall.

The Eastlight Box file which I have in my possession and measured (in inches converted then to mm) is the one the competition box size "rule" is based on - it is 368 mm x 264mm in its outside - edge dimensions - probably its an old Imperial sized unit for "Foolscap Folio" paper, which was larger than A4 as you point out Steve - thats irrelevant to the competition sizing {and the "modern" A4 paper fits within the box I have}, so thats the derivation of the maximum size for the comp layout design per "box" -. 

So if you have access to a Foolscap Folio box file, use that for your entry size dimensions; if you can only source the "modern international" standard A4 type box file, then design/build your layout to that set of dimensions - {what's a few mm between friends - its 70 one way, 54 the other.}

That box I have was 75mm "tall", so thats the maximum height a layout's trackage can be above the box file datum line: i.e. you can either fit the layout trackage on the bottom of the box, or on the top of it, but no higher.

However, you can add a scenic backdrop, which could then fold down onto either the Foolscap or A4 box file, up to that ruling measurement {either 264 or 210 mm, depending on which Eastlight box file you happen to have in your possession}.

Suitably confused ?? - to reiterate -the single Box file maximum dimension is 368mm long; 264mm wide and 75mm tall. {so you can fit an A4 design into that easily}.  

and I always thought there is only one size for A4 (paper not the car), didn't know there was an old english A4 and a "modern" A4, never too old to learn something new every day...

sorry, it seems I did totally missunderstand the whole thing then, I thought I can build modules out of MDF or the like in the size or in parts of the size of these "Eastlight Boxes" - it makes the whole thing easier for me, I will entry a design then...  

Hi,

So my original question: "Could someone please advise on the interior dimensions of said Box File", remains unanswered.

TIA.

Regards,

Dorian

Good sir- there are still five & one half months to go - however,having measured the thickness of the sides of the "master Eastlight Box File" (from which the 368 x 264 mm dimensions - maximum was derived), I am in a position to reliably inform you that each side/end is a universal 5mm thick (for some reason the lid is 2.5mm thick) - so, I suggest you subtract the requisite number, should you wish for your design to fit in the "master" File Box.

[sorry Steve - apparently there never was an old "English" A4 size - The Imperialists (& we in the colonies no doubt followed their  suit) evidently produced their paper to a range of sizes which would have been measured in inches historically) - at some stage everyone seems to have switched to the "international"  standard measurements in mms hence the A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 series of measurements for paper etc we buy nowdays.

I guess the file box I found at home ( manufactured by Croxley) must have been a pre A4 sized one - so everyone gets a slightly bigger area to work with.

   ]

Thank you, sir.

Regards,

Dorian

Looks like an interesting competition. 

Howdy,

Was just wondering if there is a template available anywhere for the facia notes?

It's not something I have (physically) seen much of before (I recall the Merijigs layout had one, but that was exhibited some 2 years ago down at Tinwald, and the memory does fade with time ... and age ). I know facia notes are a regular feature of British exhibition layouts, but photographs tend to concentrate on the layout (and not the notes).

So ... any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Dorian

Hmmm - "fascia notes" - as Dorian noted, this seems to be a part of the art of railway modelling that the Brits have advanced pretty well, so a judicious thumbing of their mags and websites should come up with some ideas for you - don't really have a 'template" as such for this, and this is one of the areas for competition entrants to really display originality and Kiwi innovativeness.

By way of a minimalist "guideline", perhaps each design/layout submitted should have a suitable name, a trackplan, some notes about its rationale/purpose, a logo, protoype scene pictures &/or history (where relevant), then anything else which the designer considers to be appropriate to enable the judges to comprehend the thinking behind the design/construct.  

Thank you, sir.

Regards,

Dorian

Howdy,

Unfortunately, I have to withdraw from the challenge.

Am stymied by the fact I am unable to use either Set Track or small radius turnouts for the layout; have a swag of the first and several of the other to hand, but no readies to spend on model railroading - SWMBO, the only breadwinner in the house was made redundant on Friday. Looks like very lean times ahead.

Dorian, sorry to hear that but you still could enter your design to the challenge (from the rules: to design and/or build) if you can't build it...

Thanks for pointing that out, Steve.

The time not spent working on the Challenge layout means more time spent on constructing my own layout.

Regards,

Dorian

Have prised the spring clips off a pair of Folio boxes, and pruned a couple of Pinex inserts to fit inside them. The pix also show trialling of the  layout of trackage for the mainline and two sidings into the planned coal-mine extension at Pendarves, plus a cut-out for the TTn3.5 scaled coal mine over the two sidings (one for empties, one for fulls) - the two PECO PO wagons are there to test siding lengths, clearances etc.

The sleeper bases are from the 2mm Scale Assn Easitrac trial shipment I recently received - these are to accomodate the Code 40 n/s flat-bottom rail they now produce (I think I have "cracked" a way to use these products to produce "narrow-gauge" 9mm wide track from the 9.42mm original - more on those experiments later.)

The 2nd box will contain point-work, a trestle, station yard (with buildings) and some other scenic paraphenalia still to be determined. It may be necessary to include a third box, to complete scenic picture, or to hold a fiddle yard - still pondering.

delicious...

I strongly recommend that you make a cardboard mock-up of an La wagon body to exact scale (just make a floor and four sides) and put it on a Peco wagon chassis to test lengths and clearances. You will find you need to saw the wagon chassis in half and move it apart a bit to get the right length. Using the Peco wagons as they are now will lead to inadequate lengths and inadequate clearances if you proceed as you have described.

To be honest there is only 2mm difference  in width, height and length of a peco wagon, compared to a Trackgang La, so using something you have at hand which is already made seems sense to me.

Thanks for those thoughts re wagon clearances - the reason I using the PECO N scale ones, is because these represent one of the types of rolling stock which are allowed to operate on the Pendarves Railway - a number of local coal merchants, so the story goes, were inveigled into following the UK system back in the 1880's by the line's promoters, so they still actually own & livery their own rolling stock - as the NZR is "allowed", for a small fee, to draw loco coal from the Company's mine, I will test the proposed formation out my TG La & Lc wagons to ensure adequate clearances for them tho'.

Now, who is going to produce some Q coal hoppers in TTn3.5 ??   

I've head good things about plastcard and knives.....:v)