Spikeyorks

Hi All, Apologies for not posting for a few days but I've been tied up at work and hadn't logged on until last night. Crikey I can now there have been quite a few suggestions made which I will respond to in due course. In some cases, although the suggestions have merit, they move the layout too far away from what I originally envisaged. However I will try and digest (and pinch) all ideas that I think are helpful. I am reflecting on a few issues; 1) Changing to cassettes to simplify the track layout. (A few people have suggested that 4 car max train length would be OK). 2) Putting the stabling sidings back at the left hand end to give the longer scenic run (and make the crossover more relevant). 3) Introducing a curve (although this would stop me from ever extending at the RH end). 4) Adding 3 inches to both width and overall length. Just for the hell of it I quickly mocked up the following. It isn't finished and, ironically, it assumes a 4 road traverser. (1 square = 3 inches) It is similar to my other track plans but is more curvy. I still plan to elevate the station building to maximise the length of my platforms. Tonight I will play with this some more and also read through everyone else's suggestions in more detail. I appreciate all the feedback as there are plenty of "nuggets" there that will be helpful. David

Well I now think it time to expand on my idea for the traverser. I do agree that for home use it would be easier to have a forward facing traverser. However I am less sure about the scenery compromises to achieve this. (Also there is an outside chance that I might want to exhibit locally). So, inspired by Peter flipping his drawing, I have therefore decided to consider making the layout flippable too, And I think I can do this by adding symmetry to the layout and being smart/simple with the backscenes. My plan is to simply have detachable backscenes that are brick retaining walls with pictured houses above. (Metcalfe specials maybe?) By adding an additional road crossing at the opposite end of the central board I then have a symmetrical sided board. (I also have somewhere extra to securely attach the backscene too). I can then fit the same backscene on either side (top or bottom of the plan) thus being able to have the layout either way around. I can nearly do the same on the station board however this backscene couldn't include the overbridge as there isn't a matching one at the other end. However, so long as I am careful with the scenery, I could still swap the backs right up to the point of the final overbridge. (I would then just need to have two small backscenes for the top and bottom of that road bridge area). The only downside I can see is that I wouldn't be able to "see" the single headshunt at the bottom of the layout. For home use I don't think I would miss that and I would now have the plus of being able to have the layout either way round. What do you all think? I think that this idea could work although I know that there would be implications for the control panel. However simply for a scenery and physical point of view is there any reason why I couldn't try for the best both of both worlds? (From an operating point of view the layout would fit either way round in my available space). So is this just plain daft or worth investigating further? Thanks David

Hi Jonny I think I am definitely now sold on the idea of the washer by the diamond. (Lengthy shunting manoeuvres are no bad thing). I have now drawn this in and then will, in due cause, add all sorts of scenery paraphernalia around this area. Thanks David

Hi Mike I am coming round to the idea of siting the washer by the diamond. Thanks Chris. 1) It would definitely be an old box that had been re-equipped. 2) The other good thing about siting it by the diamond would be that any associated huts/offices could be sited nearby. 3) We will assume that all points around this area would be operated by hand. 4) We'll leave the signal box where it is. I will tweak the plan and then explain my traverser idea. Thanks David

Hi Chris. It could do. The attached photos show how close Chingford's washer is to the stabling sidings there. So I guess siting it immediately above the diamond would be plausible. Unless anyone else knows differently? David

I promise I won't mention the M word !!! Thanks for the time you have taken to draw the plan however the revisions have meant that it has now lost many of the things on my wish list. I know it might sound silly bit I must have the diamond crossing, I do want some sort of believable freight, And I want plenty of siding stabling space so that I can see as many emus as possible. However I do think that I no have a cunning plan to resolve the siting of the traverse once and for all. (In fact it's so cunning that I'm going to double check my thoughts to make sure that I've not made an obvious mistske). Watch this space. David

Regarding the signalling then I think nearly everything would be signalled apart from the far RH crossover which I do think would be controlled by a ground frame. I guess the point controlling access to the 2 EMU stabling roads could be controlled by a second ground frame. Would that be likely? My concern about the carriage washer was whether one would ever be sited that close to, or even under, a road overbridge? My washer won't be a covered one as I am running GE electrics with pantographs. By the way, Is it likely that the point immediately in front of the washer would've been lever controlled? Personally I like the two routes to and from the stabling sidings. Yes I do see units arriving and departing from these without going through the station. These would be reverse ECS workings in the two rush hours. (Also, as you guessed Mike, the signature crossover is a must). I think I will give catch points a miss. It is one complication that I can do without. (There will be enough of those when I have to start thinking about all the masts and OHLE that will have to go up). Thanks once again for the suggestions. David

Below is the plotted plan with the washer road and the stabling sidings swapped around. The immediate plusses of this are as follows; 1) The traverser now has much more room to operate within. (I have also reduced the number of roads to 5). 2) There are now 3 stabling sidings at the RH end all of which can now take 4 car emus. 3) Platform 3 can now take a 4 car emu as can the centre road. 4) The washer now is on the LH edge of the central board. 5) I have reinstated the loco release road for the CL31 suburban services. My only questions at the moment are; a) Is the signal box in the correct location? b) Is the washer unit too close to the road overbridge? Any more suggestions / ideas? (Now I'm going to mull over Phil's suggestion of putting the traverser at the front of the layout). Thanks David

Hi Peter There were going to be 3 platforms at the station. (Platform 3 was going to be walled). However I suspect it is going to be impossible now to avoid ending up with 4. That isn't a bad thing by the way......in fact it might enable me to do something on the parcels front. (I have a RM CL302, a CL129 single unit and could acquire some grubby Mk1s etc). So let's make PL4 dedicated to parcels traffic and see what it looks like. David

Hi Phil Thanks very much for the science. I will use this, together with Mike's suggestion above, to see if I can nail this once and for all. I will definitely need to add a 'clumsy' factor to my measurements as I have a habit of knocking things over. Hopefully only having the one siding at that end of the board will give me the space to get at 5 traverser roads working correctly. (Remember I can have a train coming in on the mainline and exiting on the engineers siding. It can then reverse that route when it departs. There is an assumed crossover the other side of the road bridge). I've got a feeling that we might be there now. Thanks David

Oh that's an idea I hadn't considered as I'd only really worked from the Enfield Town template. You're right I think I would get my 3 stabling sidings back......but at the RH end of the layout. The washer siding would also work at the LH end and it is away from the station plaforms which was another concern. I will definitely plot this layout over the weekend and see what it looks like. You may well have solved the conundrum. Thanks very much Mike.

At the moment I am working on the basis that at least 4 roads of the traverser will line up with both main lines. The fifth should then line up with the down main line (but not the up). The fifth and sixth roads would also be tied up with the engineer's siding. Whether this actually works of course is another matter. It has been suggested to me that I could work with cassettes (and dramatically simplify everything) as my emus don't need to be turned. Personally I'm not sure about a 4 foot long cassette however lifting straight up and down might work.......mind you I might also drop the thing too !!! Raising the emu stabling sidings would appeal as that is how they were in real life at Enfield Town. However introducing gradients into my station throat might be one ambition too much. Does anyone have accurate width dimension for both the size and the "area of travel" of a 4 / 5 and 6 road traverser? Thanks David

Right on both counts. It would be a realistic turnaround procedure and I agree it is a perfect 'showing off' location. (Basically that's what my fake siding stub was going to be too). I think I'll put the release road back in. Do you think having a refuelling point there a bit over the top? Personally I now think this unlikely and that perhaps just a grubby siding with some sort of hut would be more typical. David

It's for a home layout. I might have a couple more inches I could play about with but, other than that, there isn't much wriggle room. (I think the ideal for this layout would've been 3 x 5 foot boards). If I raise the station building above the tracks then I envisage the whole of the right hand end also being low relief shops. That should mean that I don't have to model anything else. (Not even a footbridge). Just have the road, a forecourt and a low relief building up top. (Doing that would mean that I could even turn the station into a partially modelled through station with a second traverser.....albeit I could never use that at home). I'm not completely convinced by the extra siding by the washer however I have now lost an emu storage road to a more realistic traverser space. (I guess it would only be at exhibitions that someone would point out that only 3 3/4 of my 4 car emu had passed completely through the washer). David

I have tweaked my layout plan to take into account some of the suggestions made. These are as follows; 1) More room for the traverser (but at a cost of an emu stabling road). 2) Second siding by the washer (but now the washer is on the RH board and the siding might not take a 4 car unit). 3) Possible Platform 4 (although I do envisage PL3 being walled). 4) Raise the station building above the tracks thus lengthening platforms slightly. 5) No engine release road. 6) Short stub of isolated track to represent the end of one of the off site engineers sidings (links to traverser). 7) Can't make the layout more wiggly I'm afraid. So what does everybody think? Better or worse? David