The Kelsby Light Railway; or, Red's Hopeful Layout

[RedGemAlchemist]

Sem has just mentioned something which has scared the bejeezus out of me. It's something that I've been on about on my workbench thread before but now it's actually going somewhere what he said brought it back into incredibly sharp focus.

 

Nearly all my stock and three of my locomotives are Triang. If I can't get something track-wise that all of that will work on I'm screwed because I can't afford to rewheel it all. Help?

Edited May 21, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[Edwardian]

Sem has just mentioned something which has scared the bejeezus out of me. It's something that I've been on about on my workbench thread before but now it's actually going somewhere what he said brought it back into incredibly sharp focus.

 

Nearly all my stock and three of my locomotives are Triang. If I can't get something track-wise that all of that will work on I'm screwed because I can't afford to rewheel it all. Help?

 

I think 'try before you buy' in volume, but I'd be fairly relaxed.

 

I've sent the Rivarossi Bourbonnais's pizza cutter wheels through CA's track-work with no issues.  For a friend I tested an ancient Triang Stannier Pacific, the wheels of which would not so much cut pizza as plough furrows into one, but it runs forwards and backwards through even the point-work without a problem.

 

The track concerned is Code 75 bullhead - SMP/Marcway flexitrack and turnouts built with C&L chairs.

 

If proprietary turnouts in Code 100, 82 or 75 are less forgiving, I'd be surprised, but at least you know you can get round the problem by hand-building your own!

[RedGemAlchemist]

I think 'try before you buy' in volume, but I'd be fairly relaxed.

 

I've sent the Rivarossi Bourbonnais's pizza cutter wheels through CA's track-work with no issues. For a friend I tested an ancient Triang Stannier Pacific, the wheels of which would not so much cut pizza as plough furrows into one, but it runs forwards and backwards through even the point-work without a problem.

 

The track concerned is Code 75 bullhead - SMP/Marcway flexitrack and turnouts built with C&L chairs.

 

If proprietary turnouts in Code 100, 82 or 75 are less forgiving, I'd be surprised, but at least you know you can get round the problem by hand-building your own!

I was thinking of using shop-bought Code 100 personally. Thanks for the advice, maybe I should calm down a little.

And funny you should mention the Triang Stanier Pacific. I have one sem gifted me amidst his box of goodies on the shelf as a test loco. Would never use it on the KLR proper because a Pacific on a route availability 5 like the KLR? Madness!

Edited May 21, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[James Harrison]

 

Just a quick SCARM sketch showing what I described yesterday.  I've followed your station layouts from the rolling stock thread (I think they'll fit), track I've used Peco Code 100.  I've assumed your workshops to be just a series of low relief buildings with the running line going down the side; there is (should be!) room for a siding or two if you have a more of a mini-Swindon or Crewe in mind.  The track to the left and above the plan is there as a sort of sizing guide- more to keep me within the limits than anything else.  It's a little smaller than your available space.  It's basically a shelf layout with a terminus on the diagonal; you could really go to town with introducing some nice sinuous curves with flexible track to get rid of the regimented setrack look and- well if it were mine I'd be looking to model a landscape with a railway just happening to run through it. 

 

SCARM software (free download!): https://www.scarm.info/index.php

[RedGemAlchemist]

 

Just a quick SCARM sketch showing what I described yesterday.  I've followed your station layouts from the rolling stock thread (I think they'll fit), track I've used Peco Code 100.  I've assumed your workshops to be just a series of low relief buildings with the running line going down the side; there is (should be!) room for a siding or two if you have a more of a mini-Swindon or Crewe in mind.  The track to the left and above the plan is there as a sort of sizing guide- more to keep me within the limits than anything else.  It's a little smaller than your available space.  It's basically a shelf layout with a terminus on the diagonal; you could really go to town with introducing some nice sinuous curves with flexible track to get rid of the regimented setrack look and- well if it were mine I'd be looking to model a landscape with a railway just happening to run through it. 

 

SCARM software (free download!): https://www.scarm.info/index.php

That is damn near perfect. The workshops area gives me a bit of room to maybe make another small station, and personally I'd move Alnerwick Station a teeny bit closer to the quarry. But yeah, damn near perfect. And yeah, there are meant to be a couple sidings at the workshops for repairing the locos, plus a goods siding with a shed at the end for Berkham Station which sits alongside. But that's damn close to what I had in mind. Still not sure on the exact scaling here but at least I now know what I'm aiming for. Thank you very much James!

 

And yes, landscaping it is going to be a big part of it. I want to really capture the feel and look of rural East Anglia. The Norfolk countryside is just as much a part of the KLR as the engines or the stock. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[RedGemAlchemist]

Another thought crosses my mind. I'm living in a rented house. Sooner or later I might be forced to leave. I need to learn how to make this able to be dismantled without it having to be hacked apart and destroyed.

That's a thought for later though. I'll cross that when I come to it.

Edited May 21, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[RedGemAlchemist]

 

By the way, another comment. Which line at Alnerwick Quarry would you recommend Mastodon's shed sit on?

[Edwardian]

By the way, another comment. Which line at Alnerwick Quarry would you recommend Mastodon's shed sit on?

 

The shortest.

 

 

Another thought crosses my mind. I'm living in a rented house. Sooner or later I might be forced to leave. I need to learn how to make this able to be dismantled without it having to be hacked apart and destroyed.

That's a thought for later though. I'll cross that when I come to it.

 

Build separate boards and bolt together. Avoiding joins under turnouts

 

That is damn near perfect. The workshops area gives me a bit of room to maybe make another small station, and personally I'd move Alnerwick Station a teeny bit closer to the quarry. But yeah, damn near perfect. And yeah, there are meant to be a couple sidings at the workshops for repairing the locos, plus a goods siding with a shed at the end for Berkham Station which sits alongside. But that's damn close to what I had in mind. Still not sure on the exact scaling here but at least I now know what I'm aiming for. Thank you very much James!

 

And yes, landscaping it is going to be a big part of it. I want to really capture the feel and look of rural East Anglia. The Norfolk countryside is just as much a part of the KLR as the engines or the stock. 

 

James's is a great plan.  Beware of overcrowding it.  Maybe add the workshop sidings then call it a day?

 

You still have a quart in a pint pot IMHO.

[James Harrison]

I'd say either the very short siding, or a shed at Alnerwick station. 

[RedGemAlchemist]

The shortest.

 

I'd say either the very short siding, or a shed at Alnerwick station. 

That sorts that then. I'll go for the little shed at Alnerwick. Lets me flesh out the station a little more.

 

Build separate boards and bolt together. Avoiding joins under turnouts

Duly noted. That works.

 

James's is a great plan.  Beware of overcrowding it.  Maybe add the workshop sidings then call it a day?

 

You still have a quart in a pint pot IMHO.

Couldn't have said it better. I will keep that in mind. I'll see how it turns out when I start putting it together. But yes, sticking too much into it would be a very bad idea, so that will need to be avoided.

Edited May 21, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[James Harrison]

As is usually the case, having drawn something I then find things to improve!  (By the way Red this is entirely your railway, my plans/ advice are purely advisory so by all means tweak and play around with it to get exactly what you want).

 

The more I look at Hewe the more I think a pair of 'Y' points instead of a L/H / R/H pair would give a better flow to the layout.  Or even, for a bit of interest, a R/H / R/H or L/H / L/H pair, so the running line slews as it comes out the halt. 

 

If you want Alnerwick closer to the quarry I might be tempted to look at putting it on a curve, which then might mean the line curves a little more before opening into the quarry. You could even run Alnerwick as a push-pull operation (14xx and autocoach, or an early diesel railcar, or even the very pretty GWR steam railmotor!) which then gets rid of the need for a run road loop at all.

 

I forgot to mention that the line past my note of 'workshops' would need to be running downhill; the intention would be that it runs under the scenic lines and then comes in on the other diagonal.  Thus if you were to be standing between my notes of 'Kelsby' and 'Quarry' you can operate Kelsby, Alnerwick, the quarry and the fiddleyard without having a long walk between them all.  

 

(Terrible flickr sketch...)

 

 

So the line runs downhill, tunnels under Kelsby station throat whilst turning, then you've got a low-level fiddle yard. 

 

As I say, presented purely as an afterthought really. 

[RedGemAlchemist]

As is usually the case, having drawn something I then find things to improve!  (By the way Red this is entirely your railway, my plans/ advice are purely advisory so by all means tweak and play around with it to get exactly what you want).

 

The more I look at Hewe the more I think a pair of 'Y' points instead of a L/H / R/H pair would give a better flow to the layout.  Or even, for a bit of interest, a R/H / R/H or L/H / L/H pair, so the running line slews as it comes out the halt. 

 

If you want Alnerwick closer to the quarry I might be tempted to look at putting it on a curve, which then might mean the line curves a little more before opening into the quarry. You could even run Alnerwick as a push-pull operation (14xx and autocoach, or an early diesel railcar, or even the very pretty GWR steam railmotor!) which then gets rid of the need for a run road loop at all.

 

I forgot to mention that the line past my note of 'workshops' would need to be running downhill; the intention would be that it runs under the scenic lines and then comes in on the other diagonal.  Thus if you were to be standing between my notes of 'Kelsby' and 'Quarry' you can operate Kelsby, Alnerwick, the quarry and the fiddleyard without having a long walk between them all.  

 

(image)

 

So the line runs downhill, tunnels under Kelsby station throat whilst turning, then you've got a low-level fiddle yard. 

 

As I say, presented purely as an afterthought really. 

Well, the KLR has plenty of small tank engines to do the short run to Alnerwick. Got a rota for them. Though by the sounds of it Wanderer, my beloved Airfix 14xx, will be getting a good workout. As much as I love Bulldog, a 50-year-old Triang 0-4-0T isn't really fit for regular service, so mostly it'll be a swap between Wanderer and Geoffrey Lake as it stands by the looks of it.

 

That is a very neat and compact design. I'm glad I've definitively decided to use some minor variation of this as it's a million times better and more well thought-out than anything I'd come up with. I've always been more of an aesthetic designer, not an engineer.

 

Also putting Alnerwick on the curve was exactly my thought, and I'd actually go with the RH/RH combo or the Y/Y combo. Also having the line curve down will be interesting, as I'd been thinking of the line up to Hewe to come upwards a bit (kind of like the one in the video on the last page) to allow Alnerwick Quarry a bit more scenic potential by having a rock wall there, so might make things a little complex, but we can work with that. At this point we're all just brainstorming. If I come up with any ideas I'll say, and let me know if you do. I'm winging it here so I need all the help I can get.

Edited May 21, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist

[Nearholmer]

One thing I’m a slightly worried about fitting into this pint-pot, along with the quart of track, is the operator.

 

Unless our correspondent is of the racing snake physique, this might require further attention.

 

And, having got the operator in, there is the question of how to get them out again.

[RedGemAlchemist]

One thing I’m a slightly worried about fitting into this pint-pot, along with the quart of track, is the operator.

 

Unless our correspondent is of the racing snake physique, this might require further attention.

 

And, having got the operator in, there is the question of how to get them out again.

You do have a point. While I'm not massive I'm not exactly small.

[mervyn]

Just caught up with the topic and to backtrack and no criticism intended but already rules are being written light railway no expresses freelancers non prototypical I know these are just opinions but....just enjoy it run wot you like....and yes I am excitable and passionate ...no other way to be after all it’s what you enjoy .....rules....made to be broken except if you are in charge of a class 8.......apologies for the writing getting to grips with an I pad from a pen n ink world looking forward to the updates...

[Edwardian]

Just caught up with the topic and to backtrack and no criticism intended but already rules are being written light railway no expresses freelancers non prototypical I know these are just opinions but....just enjoy it run wot you like....and yes I am excitable and passionate ...no other way to be after all it’s what you enjoy .....rules....made to be broken except if you are in charge of a class 8.......apologies for the writing getting to grips with an I pad from a pen n ink world looking forward to the updates...

 

My dear fellow, did you actually read or understand my post, I wonder?

 

It was the essence of liberality when it came to running wot you like!

[mervyn]

Apologies Edwardian missing the point is my superpower

[James Harrison]

One thing I’m a slightly worried about fitting into this pint-pot, along with the quart of track, is the operator.

 

Unless our correspondent is of the racing snake physique, this might require further attention.

 

And, having got the operator in, there is the question of how to get them out again.

 

Good point; I've been working under the assumption that the operator is in a position between Kelsby and the quarry.  I've just measured between the two on the scarm file and it comes out at around 450mm.... which is rather tight!  If the curve into the quarry is eased a little, that distance can be increased to more like 600mm, still rather 'cosy' but you don't have to be quite so wraithlike to be able to use the layout. 

 

That still means however that the long back straight past the workshops can't be reached; at least not easily (without ducking under the boards I mean).  And of course there will need to be a hinged or lit-out section to get into the layout at all. 

[RedGemAlchemist]

Good point; I've been working under the assumption that the operator is in a position between Kelsby and the quarry.  I've just measured between the two on the scarm file and it comes out at around 450mm.... which is rather tight!  If the curve into the quarry is eased a little, that distance can be increased to more like 600mm, still rather 'cosy' but you don't have to be quite so wraithlike to be able to use the layout. 

 

That still means however that the long back straight past the workshops can't be reached; at least not easily (without ducking under the boards I mean).  And of course there will need to be a hinged or lit-out section to get into the layout at all. 

Hmm. Maybe it's back to the drawing board with the design then. Shame, I really liked that design.

[James Harrison]

No worries; it was only ever intended to be a quick sketch idea anyway.  It could be altered further and got to work anthropometrically, possibly by shortening the run-round loop at Kelsby (which I see is about twice as long as the other loops) and introducing flexible track or cutting lengths of set track or whatnot, but for the law of diminishing returns.

 

If it has given you an idea or two of how you might get your wishlist into the available space then it has more than served its purpose. 

[RedGemAlchemist]

No worries; it was only ever intended to be a quick sketch idea anyway.  It could be altered further and got to work anthropometrically, possibly by shortening the run-round loop at Kelsby (which I see is about twice as long as the other loops) and introducing flexible track or cutting lengths of set track or whatnot, but for the law of diminishing returns.

 

If it has given you an idea or two of how you might get your wishlist into the available space then it has more than served its purpose. 

It's at least proven it's possible.

 

The issue still remains that I have no idea how to design a track layout.

[Edwardian]

Apologies Edwardian missing the point is my superpower

 

Mine is circumlocution!

[James Harrison]

It's at least proven it's possible.

 

The issue still remains that I have no idea how to design a track layout.

 

Well, you have the layout location to hand... how much track do you have?  You could do far worse than trying to lay out your stations fullsize on the floor and pushing some rolling stock (not locos) around to get an idea of how long your sidings and loops need to be.  In fact doing that you'd get a pretty good idea how large the operating well(s) need to be and how wide you can reasonably make your baseboards- you don't want to have to be trying to lean over 4' of scenery to reach a derailed train right at the back of the layout.    

[RedGemAlchemist]

Mine is circumlocution!

And mine is talking too much.

 

Well, you have the layout location to hand... how much track do you have?  You could do far worse than trying to lay out your stations fullsize on the floor and pushing some rolling stock (not locos) around to get an idea of how long your sidings and loops need to be.  In fact doing that you'd get a pretty good idea how large the operating well(s) need to be and how wide you can reasonably make your baseboards- you don't want to have to be trying to lean over 4' of scenery to reach a derailed train right at the back of the layout.    

Here's the thing...

At this point in time I don't have any...

 

And my station plans were just that - plans. They were more to help me visualise the railway in my head while I worked things like landscape out. I don't actually have solid plans for them, especially after I realised just how huge my station plan for Kelsby would actually be in real life (sorry Corbs, I know we spent ages working out Kelsby's station layout together). So it's back to the drawing board. Trial and error I guess.

[RedGemAlchemist]

A minor post here. Not really an update, as there isn't a lot to update about. I'm not totally sure what I'm doing with the layout at the moment. 

This is more about something from the latest (for those reading this in the future, June 2018) issue of Railway Modeller. (Yes, I'm a Railway Modeller man. Anyone who is not a fan of that particular magazine, don't judge please.) They've done an article on an O gauge Colonel Stephens inspired layout by Bob Alderman called St. Martin's Wharf to celebrate what would have been the Colonel's 150th birthday. Seeing as the Colonel inspired the KLR, this is definitely giving me thoughts. However, as I still have no idea what I'm doing with the KLR after the original plans kind of fell apart, I'm kind of stuck.

And might as well follow this up while I'm at it:

 

...You could do far worse than trying to lay out your stations fullsize on the floor and pushing some rolling stock (not locos) around to get an idea of how long your sidings and loops need to be.  In fact doing that you'd get a pretty good idea how large the operating well(s) need to be and how wide you can reasonably make your baseboards- you don't want to have to be trying to lean over 4' of scenery to reach a derailed train right at the back of the layout.    

That is a good idea, James, though not something that is immediately possible at the moment. I don't have full access to the shed as it's still full of junk, just managed to get in enough to stretch a tape measure across to get approximate dimensions for the interior of the shed. Once it's empty we will be able to get more accurate measurements but I doubt it'll be much bigger. This thread at the moment is more preparing what I'm actually going to be doing. Which at the moment... I'm not really sure.

Edited May 25, 2018 by RedGemAlchemist