Inglebourne.

[Kev_Lewis]

Storage space for my 7mm layout has finally become available so it's time to finalise the plans and start a new thread.

 

The layout will be stored in an built-in wardrobe which has limited the size of the boards I can use. After much fiddling on AnyRail (other layout planning software is available) I have elected to go for four baseboards each 5 foot long and 18 inches wide. Giving me a layout 20 feet long and 18 inches wide, which will just fit our living room. My plan is based on a layout from the Gauge O Guild's Small Layouts booklet what I have on the computer in PDF format. The layout that I was inspired by was Alfrescote by Roy Jackson. I tweaked the basic plan to fill my longer space and added an extra siding in front of the fiddle yard.

 

 

The aim was for a reasonably busy former GWR branchline terminus, set in the late 1950's. The bay platform would allow extra passenger services, it being assumed that there is a junction off scene. The run around loop on the main platform should being big enough for a two coach train.

 

All trackwork will be Peco as I have almost enough already having acquired a fair amount of second hand Peco flexi track and points late last year. The fiddle yard will be cassettes as it will take up less space and save on handling the stock.

 

Any comments would be most welcome.

 

Thanks.

[pwr]

Your run round loop looks a bit small even for two coaches. Could you replace the two points at the end of the platform with a double slip to get more space? The downside is that you might end up shortening the coal road but that might be preferable.

 

I shall be interested in this one. Your overall space is about the same as the viewing area on my Black Notley layout. I think mine is slightly wider however.

 

regards

 

 

Paul R

[Andrew P]

Hi Kev, Nice plan, I wish I had gone in front of the Fiddle Yard with a goods shed on Trebudoc.

 

Good luck mate and Enjoy

 

Bodgit

[Kev_Lewis]

Your run round loop looks a bit small even for two coaches. Could you replace the two points at the end of the platform with a double slip to get more space? The downside is that you might end up shortening the coal road but that might be preferable.

 

I shall be interested in this one. Your overall space is about the same as the viewing area on my Black Notley layout. I think mine is slightly wider however.

 

Hi Paul.

 

I've been following your Black Notley layout and clicking the like button for a while now. You're creating a very nice layout.

 

Although a double slip would take up less space than the two points the baseboard join would mean that I can't enlarge the loop by moving the other turnout along. The screen cap below shows a 36" x 3" box in the loop representing two coaches and it looks like there's enough room.

 

 

I think I'm going to have to print out the plans full size and put some rolling stock on it to check.

[Kev_Lewis]

Hi Kev, Nice plan, I wish I had gone in front of the Fiddle Yard with a goods shed on Trebudoc.

 

Good luck mate and Enjoy

 

Bodgit

 

Thanks Andy.

 

Hopefully I can have as much fun building my layout as you do with yours.

[Physicsman]

Morning Kev.

 

You pay a lot of visits to KL, so it's about time I had a look at what you are building!

 

I've always been a fan of Andy's Trebudoc layout - sadly sold - so pleased to watch your own venture in 7mm. Good trackplan - looking forward to followin this.

 

Jeff

[Kev_Lewis]

Morning Kev.

 

You pay a lot of visits to KL, so it's about time I had a look at what you are building!

 

I've always been a fan of Andy's Trebudoc layout - sadly sold - so pleased to watch your own venture in 7mm. Good trackplan - looking forward to followin this.

 

Jeff

 

Thanks Jeff.

 

Nothing quite as grand as KL I'm afraid!  

[Physicsman]

Thanks Jeff.

 

Nothing quite as grand as KL I'm afraid!  

 

It may not be as large, but your layout is 0 gauge. I was never interested in 7mm until Andy showed what was possible in a relatively limited space, and since then I've taken a keen interest in any 7mm layouts I come across.

 

I've got such a large investment in 4mm - and a lot on my plate with KL - that I may never get to 7mm. But there's a shunting layout lurking in the future, so who knows!?

 

Jeff

[Kev_Lewis]

There is a certain presence about O gauge isn't there? I don't know if it's the increase in size or detail, but even in a small space it just works really well.

 

I used to have a large investment in OO gauge too, but I sold most of it and bought a Lionheart 74xx pannier tank.

[TheGhostofNigelGresley]

Looking good, Kev - which points are you using at the runaround, if SL- E791 or 2 BH, you may find that the fouling point causes you a problem, so slowly do these points depart the straight and narrow ?

[Kev_Lewis]

Looking good, Kev - which points are you using at the runaround, if SL- E791 or 2 BH, you may find that the fouling point causes you a problem, so slowly do these points depart the straight and narrow ?

 

HI Chris,

 

Yes the points are SL-E791BH and SL-E792BH. As I said above they cost me very little so I'm quite keen to make use of them.

 

Could you be a bit more specific about an problems I could potentially have with them?

[TheGhostofNigelGresley]

HI Chris,

 

Yes the points are SL-E791BH and SL-E792BH. As I said above they cost me very little so I'm quite keen to make use of them.

 

Could you be a bit more specific about an problems I could potentially have with them?

 I'm with Paul, Mate, I think it looks too tight for a runaround.

 

I don't have to be right, but I have designed a 7mm layout with AnyRail, went out and bought the PECO and pulled it up because it was too tight.

 

You have SL-E791/2BH so you know how big they are, I just don't think AnyRail does.

 

I'm thinking the engine shed could go, the line could straighten up and you could have a nice and easy 4 carriage runaround, rather than what seems to me to be all a bit tight in the right hand end.

 

You could even make the proposed goods shed your engine shed, which is just for interest, no ?

 

These are just my thoughts mate, I intend it to be input, not criticism

[Kev_Lewis]

All very good, constructive ideas.

 

Firstly the goods shed has to stay where it is really. Swapping it with the engine shed leaves me with an unacceptably small goods yard. The engine shed is, as you say, just for interest, so that could possibly go. Moving the cross over along gives the plan below.

 

 

However, this only gives a slight increase in the run around loop. The purple box above is 54 inches long, which is three coaches. And this would also give me issues with the length of the fiddle yard and cassettes.

 

Just to point out something on my original plan between the points at both ends of the loop I've put a six inch section of straight track to help with the clearance. I've circled it on the screen cap below.

 

 

Next week I'm going to print the plan out full size and layout some points and rolling stock on it to get a better idea of how it will look and work.

[51235]

Hi Kev

Another thought or two; you have put the 36"x3" to represent the 2 coaches, this will give you very little room for error - you will need to stop the coaches in exactly the right position (perhaps by a figure on the platform).

Have you thought of moving both the points for the loco release onto the right hand end board and extending the headshunt behind the engine shed? This will give you a longer run round loop at the expense of shortening the engineshed road.

 

Andy

 

 

Oops our posts have crossed......trying out with stock is the best way to find out what fits.....best of luck

[TheGhostofNigelGresley]

Yes, but, if the engine shed goes, then you have the remainder of the Eastern 5ft board to stretch the runaround ?

 

I think this is what Andy is saying above ?

[Kev_Lewis]

Thanks for all the great input guys. Here's the latest plan that I've been fiddling with this morning.

 

 

I've decided in the end that the run around loop really was too small, so the loco release had to be moved over to the easterly board. This gives me a decent increase in the size of the loop, which will easily take two coaches (red box, 36") now and possibly two coaches plus a fruit D or CCT (Purple box 45"). This has meant that the engine shed has had to go because it would have been too cramped in the corner. This will make way for some much needed scenics.

 

To simplify the plan I've also replaced two points with a double slip, this gives the benefit of removing the kink in the good shed siding.  And I've also done away with the cattle dock/loading platform, it was looking a little cramped to me. The cattle dock will now go either to the north of the headshunt or in the goods yard.

[51235]

Hi Kev

Much better and it will be a lot easier to operate.

A further thought - now that you have removed the engine shed, I think you need something to balance the 'whole picture' at this end. You could add a parachute type water tower to the engine release/headshunt to service locos.

 

Keep up the good work

Andy

[RedgateModels]

Track plan looks familiar

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/534/entry-8669-track-plan-changed-again/

 

well, in some respects

[Kev_Lewis]

Much better and it will be a lot easier to operate.

A further thought - now that you have removed the engine shed, I think you need something to balance the 'whole picture' at this end. You could add a parachute type water tower to the engine release/headshunt to service locos.

 

Thanks Andy.

 

I was actually thinking along those lines too. I'm going to need facilities for taking water and the engine release is the logical place for them to go.

[Kev_Lewis]

Track plan looks familiar

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/534/entry-8669-track-plan-changed-again/

 

well, in some respects

 

There certainly are some similarities.

 

That's a very nice layout you're building there.

[Kev_Lewis]

Right, so after much pondering, head scratching and re-measuring of the built-in wardrobe where the layout will be stored, I have settled on a layout plan.

 

 

The boards have been widened to two foot which makes everything a lot less cramped and gives room for some nice curves. There is also now space again for the engine shed. I purchased a secondhand copy of A Historical Survey of GWR Engine Sheds 1947 to provide inspiration of the layout of the shed, plus lots of useful photo's for when I start scratch building the shed.

 

9mm plywood for the baseboard tops has been purchased and cut to size. I also have the timber for the frames and legs, so I've got no excuse not to get cracking.

[TheGhostofNigelGresley]

You really wanted that shed didn't you ?  

 

Looks good Kev. 

[Kev_Lewis]

You really wanted that shed didn't you ?

 

Looks good Kev. 

 

Thanks Chris.

 

Yes, well it had to be done really.

[N15class]

Just found this Kev I have a similar space so will be watching with interest.

 

The plans seem to be very workable.  My really aim would like to do something based on the north Cornwall line, the stations where quite standardised, or Corfe Castle, for wich I would need to build a bigger house. SWMBO might jib at that.

[Kev_Lewis]

Just found this Kev I have a similar space so will be watching with interest.

 

The plans seem to be very workable.  My really aim would like to do something based on the north Cornwall line, the stations where quite standardised, or Corfe Castle, for wich I would need to build a bigger house. SWMBO might jib at that.

 

Andy Y very kindly moved it over to the 7mm section for me. It was getting lost in the Layout topics section.

 

Thanks Peter. With most lines being built in pre-grouping days, by individual companies, standardisation along the lines gives us the chance to "borrow" ideas from along the line and build something that should be easily recognisable.

I know what you mean about space. My planned layout will only be able to be fully set up in one room in the house, or the garage. If only we had a bigger garden with room for a large shed, or my personal favourite an old railway carriage.