Danfilm007

You can always do an "over the top" style station like Nottingham in this situation to minimise the buildings on the platforms? Anyway, today's "brainwave" is followed by seeing Hornby Magazine's Grand Central layout. As prev suggested, I could use scenic up the fiddle yard area, to do something similar like the bottom of their layout for the sidings? https://www.keymodelworld.com/article/building-great-central-railway

I certainly appreciate it (and am enjoying the debates going on too!) and I like the ideas - all are welcome!

Food for thought! It does flow quite nicely. I must admit I'm a bit of a sucker for the way Oxford Road flows with its point works and tightness but it does obviously work better your way

Interesting idea! Certainly is an interesting concept. Part of my reason for an Oxford Road style station was the variety of running but this station is more flexible in terms of reversal bays etc!

Mostly DMUs/EMUs and a couple of Loco hauled passenger stock

You are right, I think I'll abandon the idea od the sidings as it seems a bit much. I think I'll steal the changing heights aspect though!

Me again! I had some thoughts the other day. There is a layout on here that I can't recall the name of but it's a Northern modern image layout with some carriage sidings outside the station, plus layouts like Bradfield Gloucester Square where there is a mix of both station and sidings. I've taken some inspiration from Stockport station, so I have added in both another through platform at the top (which I may "dead end" or put a point on the lift-out section for it) and some basic sidings and a headshunt. The station at Stockport is also a bit easier - it starts in a bit of a cutting and ends on a viaduct so it could be a slightly more practical thing to model. Finally, it gives some more storage in the scenic area. Do you think I am slightly mad to incorporate it?

I'll give it a go! Really, the fiddle yard entrance is just too tight to fit any more points or changes in - this layout gives me a few extra loops and growth opportunities on those ends!

Very interesting topic (thanks to Accurascale guys and gals, you have some wonderful models!). As a modern-image ish (2000s onwards) modeller, Electrostars are a key part of the modern railway and have always seemed a huge gap given the variety of models, locations etc. Even for North West modellers, a substantial number of them have been tested and run up here. I would love more Voyagers and Turbostars. In fact, one of my first models I was given was a 3 car Voyager! Ultimately, for me the biggest gaps are 185 and 360s (although why Bachmann haven't done them yet surprises me), plus the new CAF units seem to be quite a gap too which could be filled fairly well... Growing up on the East Coast I have a soft spot for the 365s too, maybe worth doing?

Thank you! I can fit a 15ft building in the space (this is all long-term!!) so even accounting for insulation and smaller interiors 14ft inside should touchwood be fine. Obviously we can take length out if needs be! I'm readjusted the top-left curves slightly so they are looser but even on the right hand side it is relatively tight (20"). It is all a compromise in one way or another - this version has fewer sidings but is 100% accessible from all sides, whereas the other one had more but not all were. I won't be running trains at super high speed either so I don't think it is "as much" a problem? I'll probably add one or two in - it's why I quite liked the more unconventional format as it meant there was a lot more space in each of the sidings but this is much less complex and I feel happier with it, length aside!

It is simpler! The curvature on the ends means that you can't really fit many more points in, but I have lengthened them quite a bit so you can store multiple units in the main loops and a longer train or two too. Means it is all accessible from all routes too, and it could be managed on one board controller with a Megapoints 12 point controller for example!..

I would think so! It seems to fit the available space quite well. My only challenge is trying to get the right hand side accessible from all directions (so far, you can go west to east, but can't reach the longest two sidings from the east to west direction, which is hurting my head to rectify!)

Does this look better in your eyes, then? Now you can access all of the fiddle yard sidings from the facing direction, plus a special bi-directional siding for freight stock. Min of R19 curves (but 20, 21 mostly!) for a bit looser and smoother travelling

That's a fair point, and something easily fixed by putting an avoiding line underneath the points!

Thanks Nick! I appreciate everyone's feedback and it is an interesting debate on the fiddle yard. I have inverted it, so trains can more easily go into and out of the sections in the fiddle yard. I have added one dead-end siding that more easily allows for Bay platform shuttling, plus an elongated headshunt and crossover. To me it flows better, allows simpler use for in and out units, plus a proper way of reversing trains without being too silly. Simpler? Also means most are 5ft long - easily long enough for 2x 2 car DMUs, 1x 3 and 1x2, plus freight, a 67+Mk4 set etc. Freight - not massively long (as you can tell, space is at a bit of premium!), a smaller container train and maybe some PW too, my main interest is passenger services but a lot of interesting trains in my part of the world! Most items would reverse in the fiddle yard. As a lot of trains in the real operations go towards Piccadilly and Manchester Airport and reverse, so you get a reasonable level of churn both east and west. The other benefit to this this way means if I just want to chill out with some trains trundling round, I can just do that. We all like to play trains now and then!..