Modbury - 2mm Finescale (Brunel's Baulk Road)

This looks to be a very nice project Ian.

 

You can't beat laying out some stock on a track plan to give a good feel for something...and I do like the simplicity of it.

 

I will leave someone else to comment upon the gap between the lines as that's not my strongpoint...but in my eyes looks fine - don't forget to add the layout to the 2mmFS layout index started by Kris...

I think you could justify 10 feet by assuming the railway was built to 7 foot gauge, before being reduced to narrow gauge

 

David

It might have been 10', like David says. Don't worry - mine are closer because of the location (and I may have compressed the plan widthways accidentally, and without realising until I completed all the track laying!

 

For me I would put the station platform on the other side of the line and view it through the goods yard unless you particularly want an end loading dock?

Thanks Guys.

 

The reason for putting the platform on the same side of the running line is two fold, firstly I think that access to the platform is normally in the same location as the goods yard in small stations, and secondly, the viewing side will be from the non-platform side - that way you won't notice that the little people don't actually get on or off the coaches :-)

 

I think in reality that the greater gap between the running line and the loop is probably justified, as the 6' is almost certainly the minimum between adjacent running lines (i.e. double track lines).

 

Having looked at the plan with stock on it, I think putting a bend throughout the section where the loop is might be quite attractive too (as originally drawn it is straight from one end to t'other.)

 

Ian

I'm not really convinced by David's suggestion. That might apply on a double track line between platforms, but I don't see it here.

 

The very few GWR branch line stations with loops that I've studied closely have had a gap of about 6'6" between the running line and the loop. This surprised me as I'd expected a larger gap so that there was room for a shunter to get at brakes on wagons in the loop whilst something stood or moved on the running line. In practice, I suspect they were required to wait until the running line was clear before doing anything.

 

That said, all these were loops alongside the platform unlike your plan and I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find a prototype to justify the wider gap.

 

Nick

It's aesthetically pleasing to my eye. What I'm looking forward to is how you're going to build the track and pointwork. What method will you use - Easitrac or soldered PCB?

I was looking at this and just wondered what it would look like if the entire running line and loop were on a curve. I don't think it would take up too much more space, and it would be more visually interesting from a viewing and photography point of view.

Curvaceous curves for me every time! With regard to track spacing, I thought the same as Dave (Gingerbread) as I read your comments. Certainly Abingdon (the basis for 'Ambridge')enjoyed wider spacing - to quote from the book, 'the track layout at Abingdon was unusual in that there were more sidings between the loop & the goods shed than one might usually expect. This resulted from the Broad Gauge conversion which allowed an additional siding to be squeezed into this space'. ('The Abingdon Branch' N Trippet & N De Courtais, Wild Swan).

 

So there's your excuse - just didn't need any extra sidings! Remember though that the civil engineering (bridges) will also have to reflect the wider gauge.

 

Just my six penn'orth

 

Regs

 

Ian

That seems to settle it - I'll try to bend the plan :-)

 

NthDegree,

The turnouts will all be soldered construction, I have a 3 way and another couple of turnouts that I made donkeys years ago in 2mmFS (that won't be used on this layout) - it really wasn't difficult (although my eye-sight has degraded over the last 15-20 years since they were made :-) ). I would probably use soldered construction for the plain trackwork too - however having said all that I might bite the bullet and model it all in Brunel's Baulk Road (although I would have to see if I can work out how to model it effectively with some test pieces first though).

 

The whole idea for this layout is to keep the plan simple, but still offer a little operating interest, and exploit the space possibilities of 2mmFS so that the whole plan doesn't look like a quart has been squeezed into a pint pot. (For you youngsters those are both liquid measurements from the good old days :-) )

 

Ian

...having said all that I might bite the bullet and model it all in Brunel's Baulk Road...

How about a combination of old and new track, with the sidings remaining in narrowed baulk road and conventional bullhead for the running line and loop? You might even have double-headed rail and inside keys on the sleepered track, though I'm not sure the difference would be visible in 2mm.

 

Nick

Nick,

 

I think that in 2mm people tend to use blobs of solder to represent the chairs in soldered construction :-)

 

I think that the option of having a siding or two in baulk road would be visually interesting, I think I could fabricate plain trackwork in baulk road reasonably easily - it's the turnouts that I think will be the challenge :-) - but if I could I think that the different style of trackwork would definitely make it less of a run of the mill GWR branch line.

 

I think a few more hours playing with Templot to introduce some curviture are needed, and then a few hours with my soldering iron to see what I can achieve in the way of baulk road track!

 

Ian