GWR 30's OO layout, Design help required

[MikeH_83]

Hi all,

 

I am currently trying to design my new oo layout,  But I must admit that this is where I am struggling a little due to being bad at making a final decision lol.  My layout room is 13x14ft and each of the boards being about 3ft wide.  I would like to set it around 1930's gwr with the possibility of once in awhile changing the stock out for transition era to run a few diesels and maybe also mix in a little SR stock too.

 

Things I would like to incorporate is

 

• A roundy roundy from fiddle yard and back again main line so that I can see some more prototypical formations and longer trains running
• A quiet branch line (I like the idea of making a quaint country village
• An industry of some kind for some fun with wagons
• To keep it quite scenic and semi realistic
• A viaduct of course (I was thinking on the right side as its a idea location for it)
• Interesting to operate and watch

 

I think thats about everything,  I will be going mostly computer control but I will also like to at times take control.  The FY will be stored underneath.

 

This is my current idea (not perfect, only quickly drew it up in scarm) and I am not sure if it is a good general idea or if I am missing a trick?  The branch station isn't quite perfected and I will look at more prototype pics and change that.  I like the idea of having quite abit going in places too, ergo the computer control to take over some aspects of running.

 

Thoughts?  Would a double line through station be better?

 

Thanks 

[The Stationmaster]

Hmm,

 

That's an awful lot of platform faces for a branch terminus.  True some GWR branches did have that many platforms but almost all of them had particular, and unusual, traffic reasons for having more than one or two platform faces.  And there is no long runround.

 

Similarly having a turntable is not common for GWR branches except, again, for those with a special need or some of the long distance ones which were really the end of main line routes rather than typical branches.  

 

The junction layout is also unusual although there were variations but generally an 'open' (scenically) junction like that would have been a double junction off the main lines coming down into a single line once clear of the mains.  Also the branch climbing up to go over the main lines was not a very common arrangement (although it did exist).

 

The industry sidings have no sort of protective trap point or headshunt

[Chimer]

A few initial thoughts (apart from jealousy regarding the space):

 

If you do keep the branch flying over the main, you need more space between the junction and the bridge to keep the gradient reasonable.

 

It will be tricky to "fiddle" underneath the branch terminus - you need to allow a lot of clearance if you envisage lifting stock off (but perhaps you don't).  Out in the open in front and below might be an option?

 

I note the branch terminus plan is "just an idea" but the platforms look desperately short - with the space you've got, I'd be looking at five or six feet but just one platform (and perhaps a shorter bay).  And as Mike says, a run round is essential.

 

Be aware 3 foot wide boards mean the corners are more than a four foot reach from the corners of the operating well.

 

Personally, I would go for a double track junction station but that's just me.  If you're happy with the operational possibilities the branch terminus offers, it'll almost certainly look more realistic and less cramped than my junction would!

 

Best of luck

 

Chris

[MikeH_83]

Thanks guys,

 

Iv'e took on board some of your criticisms and iv'e made a few changes.  The FY I plan on having about 1 foot underneath but not as wide so that should make it easier to access,  I can take stock off via the top if need be.  I can't quite get on with track planning software, I find it much easier with pencil and paper so it doesn't look as neat as it would do.  I would make the branch station about 6ft long to allow for a reasonable size train in.  My reasoning for the double platform was to allow more traffic but with the new double junction, one train could hold there if need be.  I would install trap points for any sidings etc too.  The double track junction would be nice but I would get worried that It might not be as entertaining for me to watch or operate unless I added a little something else..

 

Anyway here is a slightly updated version.. 

[DCB]

That Diamond crossing looks really ugly, the lack of ready to lay curved diamonds is a huge problem and I thing a simple trailing crossover on the curve near the viaduct would be better than trying to use a diamond.  Personally I would have a simple junction station like Kemble crossed with Truro, as the junction, Truro has a viaduct not far off the platform end as does Liskeard. Stroud GWR has platforms on the viaduct.  Truro must have had shunting moves onto the viaduct.

[Chimer]

I think this is the way the Stationmaster meant the junction should be laid out (done with Code 100 Streamline large radius points and long diamond) - the double track section on the branch could be longer if required ....

 

[MikeH_83]

Thanks, Yeah that's how I meant it to look lol.  Silly programs lol, or silly operator more like it!  Anyway I will be planning to make my own trackwork in oo or 4-sf so I can make things to suit no probs.  I will have a look see if I can find some plans for Kemble and Truro and see if I can mash up an alternate idea with that and see which would give better operation

[The Stationmaster]

Branch terminus is much better and now lacks only one trap point/headshunt which is easily solved.

 

Chimer has drawn the correct layout for the junction.

 

The only real problem now is the facing entry to the industry sidings at the branch junction and the lack of a trap point (or headshunt in lieu thereof) so that needs to be sorted.

[Chimer]

I would have the point to the industrial sidings coming off the branch once it's down to single track, preferably far enough from the junction so the sidings can be shunted using the branch as the headshunt without fouling the junction.  That's assuming the point stays as shown, facing for trains inbound to the terminus, so it will be shunted in the trailing direction by outbound trains.  Operationally that will be interesting as all traffic for the sidings will have to be worked via the terminus.

 

A foot clearance for the fiddle yard means you will need a gradient of around 1 in 12 up to the terminus ........ 1 in 40 is the steepest most people on here think is reasonable ........ I stay on the flat myself!

[DCB]

I think you need to accept a limited clearance over the hidden sidings/ loops 6" might be achievable with a 1 in 35 branch gradient and a 1 in 70 main line which is marginal for fiddling. Alternatives are having the loops open behind the branch station or scenery on removable boards or hinged lids.

I have made baseboards only 1" thick in the past using mdf stiffened by 2X1 timber on its side  I think I would keep set trains on hidden loops and have some form of kick back hidden sidings al la Frank Dyer Borchester.  I did a doodle on your plan with a simplified terminus and platforms at your junction. The gradient would start part way along the platform, which was a feature of some full size stations.  The summit and slight downhill into the station is operational to stop modern stock running away down the gradient to the junction.

 

I think the viaduct and tunnels and steep gradients give this a bit of a south Devon Banks feel so with 1 in 70 gradients presenting as full size 1 in 35 short trains of 7 ish coaches with a King or 10 with a King and Bulldog pilot would be prototypical. Maybe add a goods loop coming from the hidden sidings, use as loop or lay bye and detach pilot engines a la Brent in the 1930s and you could have some good operation, you could even add a quarry siding as per Stoneycombe just west of Newton Abbott.

[Neal Ball]

In that amount of space you will have plenty of options. I would suggest you look at the OPC books of station layouts.

 

It's very tempting to have an upper and lower level, which is what I have done, but watch the gradients.... even something reasonable might be an effort for some locos, depending on how long you want the trains to be.

 

Good luck with the project.

[MikeH_83]

Thanks all for the very good feedback,  David thanks for the plan,  I hadn't thought about a station on the mainline there, That could certainly add alot of interest.  I like the idea of a pilot engine too for the viaduct part, with computer automation it could really look something special

 

Cheers

[unravelled]

I think gradients will be the problem. No point in having long branch platforms if you can't run long trains.To gain more height more gently, could the branch do a complete circuit of the room between function and terminus. This might lose a bit of modelling area in the corners, but as has been said thes are difficult to access from above. Emergency access to track could be from below.

 

hth

 

Dave

[MikeH_83]

I think gradients will be the problem. No point in having long branch platforms if you can't run long trains.To gain more height more gently, could the branch do a complete circuit of the room between function and terminus. This might lose a bit of modelling area in the corners, but as has been said thes are difficult to access from above. Emergency access to track could be from below.

 

hth

 

Dave

 

I could do,  Did any branch lines ever have banker engines?  That could add some operational interest having a loco help push another to the branch terminus?  Either way for the branch part im thinking of 3 or 5 coaches max

[DCB]

I could do,  Did any branch lines ever have banker engines?  That could add some operational interest having a loco help push another to the branch terminus?  Either way for the branch part im thinking of 3 or 5 coaches max

Plenty of GWR Branches ran with 2 coach "B" sets of 2 bogie brake composites permanently coupled together, others with Auto trains. In the early 1930s this could be 4 X  4 wheel or 6 wheel coaches.  I would not expect 5 full length bogie coach trains on a rural branch apart from a special event, excursion and they would normally be double headed rather than banked if necessary.  Short trains look good in long platforms, most Branch termini platforms would take at least 5 coaches.

A goods may well be banked out of the junction to the summit and then drop off, which is fun, especially with DCC, but I would expect most RTR locos to manage 12 plastic wagons up a 1 in 35.  I use Hornby Dublo wagons which are twice the weight and run 3 times as hard and most small tanks get 6 of them up our 1 in 36.    Running the branch right round the room will eat up space against the wall and willeither look a bit odd or id hidden be a bit boring as trains do a complete lap out of sight, I have a weird idea coming on, Frank Dyer of Borchester, and Rev Peter Denny(?) had solutions to this sort of issue I will put my thinking cap on.

[MikeH_83]

Plenty of GWR Branches ran with 2 coach "B" sets of 2 bogie brake composites permanently coupled together, others with Auto trains. In the early 1930s this could be 4 X  4 wheel or 6 wheel coaches.  I would not expect 5 full length bogie coach trains on a rural branch apart from a special event, excursion and they would normally be double headed rather than banked if necessary.  Short trains look good in long platforms, most Branch termini platforms would take at least 5 coaches.

A goods may well be banked out of the junction to the summit and then drop off, which is fun, especially with DCC, but I would expect most RTR locos to manage 12 plastic wagons up a 1 in 35.  I use Hornby Dublo wagons which are twice the weight and run 3 times as hard and most small tanks get 6 of them up our 1 in 36.    Running the branch right round the room will eat up space against the wall and willeither look a bit odd or id hidden be a bit boring as trains do a complete lap out of sight, I have a weird idea coming on, Frank Dyer of Borchester, and Rev Peter Denny(?) had solutions to this sort of issue I will put my thinking cap on.

 

Ah thanks,  I will make the platform for 5 coaches but run with less coaches to make things appear more realistic. 

[MikeH_83]

I've had a little change of mind,  Rather than making things really complicated with big underneath storage roads and such and having grown a little fondness with small branch stations in the countryside I have came up with a new plan!

 

I still like the idea of being able to see main line locomotives and long trains running about I have thought about putting 2 lines running around the exterior, These will be partially hidden in quite a few places but you will just get to see them peeking in and out of the scenery at certain places.  The main part of the layout and which I can control and have some fun with will be the branch line with a passing station to give abit of operational interest leading past an industry of some kind and finally around to the branch terminus, much like the woodstowe layout which I think is fantastic.  This should give me plenty of operational interest I think but please say something if I have made a major mistake  

 

Oh and there will be trap points for the sidings etc

 

Cheers

[Chimer]

I would go for some sort of goods yard at the through station, just a couple of sidings with say a goods shed on one and coal staithes on the other.  Maybe instead of the passing loop, which is perhaps unnecessary for the last station before the terminus on a sleepy branch?

 

But an improvement over the original, I think.

 

Chris

[MikeH_83]

I would go for some sort of goods yard at the through station, just a couple of sidings with say a goods shed on one and coal staithes on the other.  Maybe instead of the passing loop, which is perhaps unnecessary for the last station before the terminus on a sleepy branch?

 

But an improvement over the original, I think.

 

Chris

 

Thanks,  Yeah I think your right, the through station could do with a siding or 2.  I might make a 2nd small fiddle yard between the 2 stations, so that the through station has the appearance of catering to more than 1 line maybe?  Anyway the idea of the passing loop was just to add a little extra interest and to see trains passing somewhere,  but maybe it's un-necessary

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Cheers

[Chimer]

Thanks,  Yeah I think your right, the through station could do with a siding or 2.  I might make a 2nd small fiddle yard between the 2 stations, so that the through station has the appearance of catering to more than 1 line maybe?  Anyway the idea of the passing loop was just to add a little extra interest and to see trains passing somewhere,  but maybe it's un-necessary

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Cheers

 

I wouldn't personally - it would limit your scope for developing the "industry".  Your goods arrangements on the branch will be plenty interesting operationally - especially if you set your through station sidings to be shunted on the way to the branch terminus, given that the lie of the industry sidings means they will be shunted on the way back.  And if the through station sidings allow you to get your trip freight clear of the through line, you could still pass trains there - which would have implications for signalling that are way beyond my understanding, but others could tell you about .....

 

Chris

[MikeH_83]

Thanks,  iv'e made a quick mockup of more of a single platform but with the passing loop for potential goods trains (I would probably alter this layout slightly when it comes to building as it doesn't look right atm).  I agree about a double platform station on a sleepy branch is abit excessive although I was hoping to have somewhere for a nice footbridge across the platforms.  Who would have thought designing a simple model railway could be so challenging lol

[davepen]

Due to holidays in the area, I've been considering the Cardigan Branch, this could give some prototype inspiration for your plans.  For me, the what to include, and what to leave out is difficult, so your minimalist rethink is of interest...

 

At the end of the branch was Cardigan - which was a single platform station with yard, carriage siding and a shed with a very small TT (0-6-0 only?)

The next station at Kilgerran had a double ended siding (or loop!).  Boncath and Crymmych were both passing stations with two platforms and sidings.

The curve at Crymmych cries out to be in a corner somewhere, and the picture of the cattle wagons filling the yard on a market day give a nice traffic excuse.

The remaining original Taf valley line stations typically had only had one siding, although Llanglydwen station had a passing loop, two platforms, and a siding.

 

The junction on the mainline was as shown above, a double junction, then the branch became single.  The mainline would have had boat trains, night mails and sleepers to Fishguard and Neyland (New Milford).  Return traffic included Fish from (Old) Milford Haven.

 

The next station at Whitland has a further branch to Tenby and Pembroke, and provided milk traffic.   

 

So your terminus has the features of Cardigan, although the yard was the other side, your small station could be Llanglydwen.  Some historical licence could be used to revive the Glogue quarry at your industrial site.  I'd include Cardigan Junction and have Whitland as your (scenic?) fiddle yard.  Although I might locate it under the industrial side.

 

At the moment I have started Cardigan as a BLT, and looking at how to squeeze Whitland into my available space.

[MikeH_83]

Due to holidays in the area, I've been considering the Cardigan Branch, this could give some prototype inspiration for your plans.  For me, the what to include, and what to leave out is difficult, so your minimalist rethink is of interest...

 

At the end of the branch was Cardigan - which was a single platform station with yard, carriage siding and a shed with a very small TT (0-6-0 only?)

The next station at Kilgerran had a double ended siding (or loop!).  Boncath and Crymmych were both passing stations with two platforms and sidings.

The curve at Crymmych cries out to be in a corner somewhere, and the picture of the cattle wagons filling the yard on a market day give a nice traffic excuse.

The remaining original Taf valley line stations typically had only had one siding, although Llanglydwen station had a passing loop, two platforms, and a siding.

 

The junction on the mainline was as shown above, a double junction, then the branch became single.  The mainline would have had boat trains, night mails and sleepers to Fishguard and Neyland (New Milford).  Return traffic included Fish from (Old) Milford Haven.

 

The next station at Whitland has a further branch to Tenby and Pembroke, and provided milk traffic.   

 

So your terminus has the features of Cardigan, although the yard was the other side, your small station could be Llanglydwen.  Some historical licence could be used to revive the Glogue quarry at your industrial site.  I'd include Cardigan Junction and have Whitland as your (scenic?) fiddle yard.  Although I might locate it under the industrial side.

 

At the moment I have started Cardigan as a BLT, and looking at how to squeeze Whitland into my available space.

 

Thanks for your input,  Yeah that has been the difficult part for me and with me starting back into the hobby I got to thinking that maybe it is better to start with something a little more simple and with a fair amount of scenics as I prefer that over just track covering every spare bit of space.  I have had a quick look at some of the stations that you mentioned and there is some interesting ideas from that,  The fact that Llanglydwen had a rather small platform from what I could tell from the pictures which could free up further space for sidings and scenics.

 

Thanks