EM gauge Terminus

[Black Country Mon]

I've just started building up my EM stock (mostly LMS/Midland/LNWR) so about time i laid plans for something to run it on.

 

The main boards will be 2440 x 500 with a sliding fiddle yard attached to the end approx 600-700 long. I'm stuck with an overall of 3150 which is one side of the shed where it will live. I can't make it an L as that would encroach onto my work bench area and the other side of the shed is used for the more normal shed type storage stuff (mowers, tools etc).

 

Anyway here's my stab at what might give me some varied stock movement. The grid is 250mm with most of the turnouts being B6 and B7.

 

 

 

It's not based on any where in particular as i'm restricted for length, protypical working is out of the window in favour of a practical solution to keep me interested with a semblance of realism.

 

Dave

 

 

Edited August 29, 2017 by Black Country Mon

[Donw]

Looking at your plan I do wonder why the main line in waggles in the middle. I think it would look more natural if it ran at a large gentle curve from the FY to the main platform. I would probably push the fy line back a little if possible take out the waggle. The line to the warehouse would end up closer to the low relief against the backscene. I know you can get waggles but they are usually due to natural features lie of the land. In you case it is just the other tracks and they could be moved by the railway.

Otherwise the plan looks workable to me. 

Don

[clecklewyke]

I agree with Donw's comment. It's a pretty standard small terminus model but I'd suggest you'd get more operational fun by increasing the goods yard and reducing the loco depot. The latter could be omitted. being imagined off-scene. But I also have three general points:

 

1) Don't attempt to include too much. Stations are very large - especially country termini which were built on cheap agricultural land. So they were far too spacious to be represented realistically in the sorts of spaces we have.  So we can model just the most interesting bits and leave out the rest. This is Iain Rice's "bitsa" approach. You don't even have to model the whole run-round loop as the left-hand points - they be part of a sector plate fiddle yard.

 

2) Putting the fiddle yard at the end of the layout will nearly double its length. Ypu could  extend the goods yard in front of the fiddle yard. See the original Castle Rackrent as an example, where the fiddle yard was behing a quay-side scene.

 

3) Read any of Iain Rice's books on compact or cameo layouts. They are ful of inspiration.

 

I hope these ideas are helpful

 

Ian

[clecklewyke]

Since writing the above I've remembered the layout which prompted my thoughts. It is Rod Hall's classic Llanastr

 

Ian

Edited September 24, 2017 by clecklewyke

[t-b-g]

Well I like it!

 

The difference between shunting 3 sidings and 4 in a goods yard is negligible and I like the loco shed. It gives extra traffic with loco coal and LE movements.

 

The only suggestion I would make is that the very first point from the fiddle yard could be changed from a RH to a LH to straighten up the exit a bit. That just leaves one bend in the main line rather than have it bending twice, with no obvious reason for them doing it "in real life".

 

I am not too keen on the layouts where the run round is done on a sector plate. Virtually every move requires the fiddle yard to be moved over and to my way of thinking, the less that is done using the fiddle yard the better. I much prefer modelling and operating a limited but complete station rather than a more spread out part of one.

 

With all these things, much of it comes down to personal preference. There is no right or wrong. Whenever anybody posts a layout design on here, you can pretty much guarantee at least a couple of people will have alterations to suggest and there is nothing wrong with that but it doesn't mean that your plan is wrong in any way, just that it doesn't fit with how they would do it if they were building it.

 

One of the most enjoyable layouts I have operated is Peter Denny's "Leighton Buzzard". On the face of it, there is a lot of railway crammed into a 6' board (which is what it was before the gas works was added). It has a goods yard, a private siding and a loco shed and can be operated for hours without getting boring.

[clecklewyke]

Well I like it!

 

....

 

One of the most enjoyable layouts I have operated is Peter Denny's "Leighton Buzzard". On the face of it, there is a lot of railway crammed into a 6' board (which is what it was before the gas works was added). It has a goods yard, a private siding and a loco shed and can be operated for hours without getting boring.

 

Thinking on, I have to say that Tony has a good point, moreover it is based on real experience of operating Leighton Buzzard. I've onlyhad  10 minutes such experience (at the famous MRJ exhibition at Central Hall (in 1990?) but that was enough to show its worth.

 

One virtue of your plan is that the goods sidings point in different directions. Peter Denny was a strong advocate this principle in improving operational interest.

 

I realise now that I should have read the original posting more carefully. Clearly access will be needed for the the fiddle yard. My concerns about jamming too much in were ironic. Of all small termini Leighton Buzzard is one of the "busiest" with even a gas works fitted in. In most hands this would be over-kill but Peter Denny carried it off somehow, to create one of my favourite layouts.

 

I'll withdraw gracefully, before I become a modern equivalent of Robbo Ormiston-Chant   and await developments with interest

Edited September 25, 2017 by clecklewyke

[t-b-g]

Thinking on, I have to say that Tony has a good point, moreover it is based on real experience of operating Leighton Buzzard. I've onlyhad  10 minutes such experience (at the famous MRJ exhibition at Central Hall (in 1990?) but that was enough to show its worth.

 

One virtue of your plan is that the goods sidings point in different directions. Peter Denny was a strong advocate this principle in improving operational interest.

 

I realise now that I should have read the original posting more carefully. Clearly access will be needed for the the fiddle yard. My concerns about jamming too much in were ironic. Of all small termini Leighton Buzzard is one of the "busiest" with even a gas works fitted in. In most hands this would be over-kill but Peter Denny carried it off somehow, to create one of my favourite layouts.

 

I'll withdraw gracefully, before I become a modern equivalent of Robbo Ormiston-Chant   and await developments with interest

 

 Leighton Buzzard is not set up and linked to the rest of the layout yet but if you get to Warley show (Or Ally Pally next year) please feel free to have another operating session.

 

Cheers,

 

Tony

[Donw]

Well I like it!

 

The difference between shunting 3 sidings and 4 in a goods yard is negligible and I like the loco shed. It gives extra traffic with loco coal and LE movements.

 

The only suggestion I would make is that the very first point from the fiddle yard could be changed from a RH to a LH to straighten up the exit a bit. That just leaves one bend in the main line rather than have it bending twice, with no obvious reason for them doing it "in real life".

 

I am not too keen on the layouts where the run round is done on a sector plate. Virtually every move requires the fiddle yard to be moved over and to my way of thinking, the less that is done using the fiddle yard the better. I much prefer modelling and operating a limited but complete station rather than a more spread out part of one.

 

With all these things, much of it comes down to personal preference. There is no right or wrong. Whenever anybody posts a layout design on here, you can pretty much guarantee at least a couple of people will have alterations to suggest and there is nothing wrong with that but it doesn't mean that your plan is wrong in any way, just that it doesn't fit with how they would do it if they were building it.

 

One of the most enjoyable layouts I have operated is Peter Denny's "Leighton Buzzard". On the face of it, there is a lot of railway crammed into a 6' board (which is what it was before the gas works was added). It has a goods yard, a private siding and a loco shed and can be operated for hours without getting boring.

 

Tony obviously you and I think along similar lines. I find keep using a sector plate while shunting kind of destroys the illusion where as when a train departs to the fiddle yard once it stops there is a natural break when I can move the sector plate once it is set up for the next train I go back to the illusion. Ideally I would like enough main line to keep the loco in the scenic part throughout shunting sadly that is not always possible.

 

Don

[Black Country Mon]

Thanks to you all who've commented, there will always be umpteen different variations possible i guess. I have taken on board some of the comments regarding orientation of the turnouts and trying to get too much in, and consequently i'm in the process of tweeking the plan slightly. It's a shame i don't have a little more room to play with as yes a small scenic section for the mainline would be nice. The loco servicing area is the main area that i have been mulling over for some time but i think it will stay maybe moved slightly and reduced in size so as to alleviate a little clutter.

 

I've been busy building the basic boards which are now done along with several of the turnouts so i need to get some foundations laid. I'll update the plan and post asap.

 

Dave

 

 

[Black Country Mon]

 

 

Labelling removed but will generally stay the same as in post 1

 

Dave

[Nick Holliday]

I quite liked the sinuous nature of the original plan. Could you have the sliding fiddle yard at a slight angle, rather than parallel to the back wall? That way you could keep the curve, rather than having to introduce that unnecessary s-bend.

As another fan of Castle Rackrent, although I understand your need to access the yard, could you not move the loco shed etc. to the left slightly beyond the exit line? That way you could have a little more space for the yard, and it would help to break up the scenic break line, while still giving you some room to work the yard.

[Black Country Mon]

I quite liked the sinuous nature of the original plan. Could you have the sliding fiddle yard at a slight angle, rather than parallel to the back wall? That way you could keep the curve, rather than having to introduce that unnecessary s-bend.

As another fan of Castle Rackrent, although I understand your need to access the yard, could you not move the loco shed etc. to the left slightly beyond the exit line? That way you could have a little more space for the yard, and it would help to break up the scenic break line, while still giving you some room to work the yard.

 

Cheers Nick,

 

Yes, i may do that, and put the main line access in the sliding fiddle yard on a slight skew instead of as the latest version. Hadn't thought about moving the loco servicing facility so that the 2 lines also form part of the fiddle but that would add some vital extra storage and as you say breaks up the exit point nicely.

 

I like it.

 

 

 

 

Dave

[islandbridgejct]

Hello,

 

I don't think you can use the chemicals siding as the headshunt for the engine shed, even in those halcyon pre-health and safety days. Maybe if you reversed them, and used the chemical siding as the engine shed, and the engine shed roads as the chemical sidings. Then you could just model the first few feet of the engine shed, and leave a loco sitting outside it where it could be seen.

 

Or leave the shed out altogether: it's just a reason to have a regular branchline engine that works everything in and out - four times a day it heads up to the junction for passengers with the same one or two carriages, and once a day it brings home the goods. Much better to see what the lads at the junction have decided to put on the branch train today, particularly if the junction has a big depot for its own traffic and could send you anything.

 

Once you extend the sidings back in front of the fiddle yard, you need a longer headshunt to work traffic into and out of them. If you liked fancy trackwork, you could make the loop into the headshunt, and cut across the goods yard lead with a diamond crossing. (Mind you, this is EM, so you may prefer fewer engines and simpler trackwork.)

 

Those are just ideas, mind. Go ahead and build it exactly the way you see it in your mind's eye. It'll be fab.

 

Alan