The Oak Hill Branch - LBSCR / SECR 1905ish - New layout starts on page 129

[Tom Burnham]

On 23/09/2021 at 11:04, BlueLightning said:

 

Stephen,

 

I had invisoned horseboxes and the like to be dealt with on the passenger platform, with a gate in the fence to the left of the station building to allow this.

 

End loading dock, yes good idea, I need one of those. If I do cut down the legth of the upper most goods siding would that be a good place to put one? I'm glad I otherwise meet your approval.

 

A 5 ton crane between the 2 front sidings seems to make sense to me, would you agree?

 

Gary

Perhaps less significant at a terminus station, but would it not have been quite usual for horseboxes to be dealt with at the passenger platform? Thinking again of Siegfried Sassoon's 'Memoirs of a Fox-hunting Man', the leading character was always taking his horse to meets near small country stations and I wouldn't have thought they would have shunted the horsebox into a special siding every time. And there would usually be a groom travelling with the horse to handle it. Different matter for a race meeting with a whole string of horseboxes, of course, or an army unit moving with officers' chargers (in horseboxes) and troopers' horses (in cattle trucks).

[BlueLightning]

Well it's been over 24 hours since the last plan was posted with no suggestions made so far. I assume this means I am safe to get the printed going in the morning and start playing in full size!

 

Pictures will follow once the track plan is stuck to the layout!

[BlueLightning]

It's the weekend! and that means as well as playing with Oak Hill, it's almost time for another livestream with South Park Quarry!! This weekend we will be doing a bit of ballasting, and then having a go at the shunting puzzle!! So join us tomorrow night at 9pm (BST) for your chance to have a go!!

 

I will be back with the link tomorrow, in the meantime I will leave you with the review of last weekends livestream, and our new technicolour buildings!!

 

Hope you enjoy,

 

Gary

 

 

[Dana Ashdown]

Two thoughts about the new layout.

 

One: Will there be any problems with heat from radiator being trapped under the baseboard?

 

Two: Could you make a provision for a removable track extension from the goods shed track out into the room? Perhaps a cart with track that could be rolled into place when needed?

[BlueLightning]

2 hours ago, Dana Ashdown said:

One: Will there be any problems with heat from radiator being trapped under the baseboard?

 

The old layout was in the same place and never had issues from it, despite having almost no ventilation, the ventilation being designed into this build should make it even less likely for heat to get trapped.

 

2 hours ago, Dana Ashdown said:

Two: Could you make a provision for a removable track extension from the goods shed track out into the room? Perhaps a cart with track that could be rolled into place when needed?

 

I wish I could do something like this, the 2 sides and the top of the drawing are against the walls, and the goods yard end has the soda against it, the sofa is way to big to move out the way when operating.

 

Gary

[BlueLightning]

It's amazing how different a plan looks when it's suddenly full size. Suppose I had best get some stock out and start playing now!

 

 

 

 

 

I'll be honest, I'm not looking forward to trying to make the shed building fit in with the station better. although extending the water tower and making it it's own chimney that is actually tall enough will help!

 

As a reminder the shed is to be based on Three Bridges as shown below

 

 

Thanks for looking, hope you enjoyed,

 

Gary

[Annie]

Looking very good Gary.

[BlueLightning]

So getting the stock out and having a play, first the good news. The Bachmann birdcage rake fits in the loop as planned, although this will probably see very little use, as I have a rake of Mallard Models SECR birdcages to build, which come in at nearly a scale 35' shorter than the Bachmann rake

 

 

and the Brighton Atlantic fits in the headshunt at the end, while I don't see me using the Atlantic's much on this layout, it's nice to know I can, I certainly can't see me using anything longer!

 

The end loading dock can fit a flat wagon (of roughly the right length for an LBSC diagram), and almost 3 cattle wagons (right length for LBSC diagrams, and honestly close enough prototype that they still might just end up with a repaint and used), which makes me feel I should extend it to fit all 3 properly, or shorten it to only fit 2, feedback appreciated

 

The bad news, I might need a slightly bigger coal stage, because the one in the middle of the tracks here looks tiny, not sure it will even fit one wagons worth of coal on it (featuring the first picture of my "new" Bachmann C Class) the tracks on the plan are slightly too close together here, so I have placed the locos in a better position, but I don't think I could widen the coal stage, so I guess I'll have to make it longer? again feedback appreciated

 

Thanks for looking, hope you enjoyed,

 

Gary

 

[ChrisN]

1 hour ago, BlueLightning said:

So getting the stock out and having a play, first the good news. The Bachmann birdcage rake fits in the loop as planned, although this will probably see very little use, as I have a rake of Mallard Models SECR birdcages to build, which come in at nearly a scale 35' shorter than the Bachmann rake

 

 

and the Brighton Atlantic fits in the headshunt at the end, while I don't see me using the Atlantic's much on this layout, it's nice to know I can, I certainly can't see me using anything longer!

 

The end loading dock can fit a flat wagon (of roughly the right length for an LBSC diagram), and almost 3 cattle wagons (right length for LBSC diagrams, and honestly close enough prototype that they still might just end up with a repaint and used), which makes me feel I should extend it to fit all 3 properly, or shorten it to only fit 2, feedback appreciated

 

The bad news, I might need a slightly bigger coal stage, because the one in the middle of the tracks here looks tiny, not sure it will even fit one wagons worth of coal on it (featuring the first picture of my "new" Bachmann C Class) the tracks on the plan are slightly too close together here, so I have placed the locos in a better position, but I don't think I could widen the coal stage, so I guess I'll have to make it longer? again feedback appreciated

 

Thanks for looking, hope you enjoyed,

 

Gary

 

 

Gary,

Were the earlier cattle wagons shorter.  If so, then leave it, and let them struggle getting the cows in.  Or build the cattle pen and then put an obvious extension on it.

 

I think you will need to extend the coal stage unless there is anywhere you can run a coal wagon next to a loco.

[richard i]

Cattle dock only needs to fit the doors so you could leave it. 
The building on the far left could have a little extra land to sit on. Who puts their head that far into the corner. 
the coal stage could be on the way to the turntable as it is all part of the same process.

just ideas

richard

[BlueLightning]

Thanks both,

 

18 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

build the cattle pen and then put an obvious extension on it.

 

I like this idea

 

3 minutes ago, richard i said:

The building on the far left could have a little extra land to sit on.

 

I had considered this, but I rather like the idea of having the building with an open end and the inside modelled, it's the stable/blacksmiths shop, so I'm thinking of having a stable boy in there tending to a horse, there won't be much of the blacksmith shop visible, it's the end that is hanging off the edge.

 

6 minutes ago, richard i said:

the coal stage could be on the way to the turntable

 

I had thought about this, but wasn't sure, it would certainly make life easier. I think it may well happen.

 

Gary

 

[BlueLightning]

It's Livestream day!! Join us tonight at 9pm (BST) as we start the ballasting, and have a play with the shunting puzzle on South Park Quarry!

 

It will be down to the viewers to solve the puzzle, so come along and see if you can solve it!!

 

See you there,

 

 

[Regularity]

The kickback siding to the coal yard will only frustrate you, as there is not enough clear siding length from the points to the goods shed to be able to get a loco and wagons in there easily. You could chain shunt, but you will then have to use the short siding to run the loco into. Either way, you are losing wagon capacity - more than if you didn’t have the kickback at all.

 

But why not have the coal siding facing the other way, and accessed from the headshunt/locoshed? Marked in red. You could also have a platform for storing loco coal (in blue) and loading it onto locos via the spur off the turntable, as per the arrangement at MacDuff on the GNoSR. Could have the platform surmounted by a water tank.

 

Mirror image of Macduff:

 

[BlueLightning]

29 minutes ago, Regularity said:

there is not enough clear siding length from the points to the goods shed to be able to get a loco and wagons in there easily

 

Simon,

 

The siding in front of the goods shed is deceptively long, using a Terrier I can fit loco + 4 without encroaching on the shed, which almost fills the coal siding, I can't see me using more than that in a single shunting move.

 

 

Obviously this gives me an issue if I am using a longer loco to shunt the yard, unless I ignore the rule of not driving locos into goods sheds, which there are plenty of examples of it being broken, such as at Hailsham on the LBSCR as can be seen by this photo from sometime in the 30's showing smoke marks above the door of the goods shed

 

The use of a kickback for the coal also matches how it was done at Hailsham, giving examples to both solutions on the LBSC, and is what I originally was thinking of when the idea of a kickback crossed my mind

 

As for putting the coal stage on the spur from the turntable, my plan for that bit of track was to leave it dead to prevent locos running off the edge of the board, possibly wired up as a DCC programming track.

 

Gary

 

EDIT: photo and trackplan of Hailsham taken from "The Cuckoo Line" by A C Elliott, a great book that I highly recommend for anyone interested in the line from Polegate to Tunbridge Wells, although for some reason it misses off the junction at Groombridge for the Oak Hill branch

Edited September 26, 2021 by BlueLightning

[Compound2632]

At that rate I'd put a double slip in to accommodate Simon's red coal siding and run a headshunt up against the backscene, parallel to the loco line, thereby separating the two. This could make it all look a bit busier and help justify the shed! There's also then the possibility for three simultaneous movements - main line, yard, and shed. You may need to grow an extra pair of hands. 

[Compound2632]

Another thought, looking at your mock up: what's the track centres between the platform line and the run-round loop? It looks quite wide. If brought down to a prototypical 45 mm or so, you will find you gain space not only widthways but also lengthways.

[BlueLightning]

4 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

At that rate I'd put a double slip in to accommodate Simon's red coal siding and run a headshunt up against the backscene, parallel to the loco line, thereby separating the two. This could make it all look a bit busier and help justify the shed! There's also then the possibility for three simultaneous movements - main line, yard, and shed. You may need to grow an extra pair of hands. 

 

See my above response to Simon

 

Just now, Compound2632 said:

what's the track centres between the platform line and the run-round loop? It looks quite wide.

 

It is quite wide, this is due to the use of the point straight onto a slip, which gives the wider section, I decided leaving it wide the full length looked better than dragging the look back in towards platform line at the left hand end

[Compound2632]

10 minutes ago, BlueLightning said:

It is quite wide, this is due to the use of the point straight onto a slip, which gives the wider section, I decided leaving it wide the full length looked better than dragging the look back in towards platform line at the left hand end

 

You can trip the ends of the points to get a closer fit. Looks so much better. Look at the double line in your Hailsham photo. Prototypical centres go some way towards disguising the narrow gauge of 00, since people are so used to seeing 00 track laid to 50 mm / 2" centres or more.

[BlueLightning]

Aha, I hadn't thought of that, that's a very good idea. I will have a play with that once I finally have some points!

[Annie]

On the Hailsham trackplan, - 'coal pens'!?  What sort of wild coal were they bringing into Hailsham!  

[BlueLightning]

Only the wildest, most unruly coal in Hailsham, that way it matches the locals

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, BlueLightning said:

Aha, I hadn't thought of that, that's a very good idea. I will have a play with that once I finally have some points!

 

Peco medium radius at 45 mm centres:

 

 

There's a bit of an issue if you use Peco large radius points, since in order to achieve the standard 12 deg angle, the curve continues through the crossing, so the crossing is less than 12 deg:

 

 

... so most of the nibbling would have to be done off the slip, in this example, to keep the through lines parallel. But in your layout, with the single line approach, this probably won't matter.

 

I prepared these diagrams using the Peco templates a while ago when I was banging on about this issue on another thread. I first carried out this dodge on my teenage layout!

 

A further advantage of laying track to prototype centres is that over-track structures such as bridges can be modelled to scale; I appreciate this doesn't apply with Oak Hill. Of course one has to transition to wider centres on curved double track but not as much as one might think if you are sensibly using 6-wheeled engines and <50 ft bogie carriages!

[BlueLightning]

Thank you for that Stephen, that's very helpful. The points on Oak Hill will all be large radius, because that's all that is currently in the bullhead range, it would be nice it they had smaller ones, but never mind.

 

Peco don't have the plans for the slip on their website yet, but I will make sure to download them to play as soon as I can.

 

Gary

[Compound2632]

12 minutes ago, BlueLightning said:

Thank you for that Stephen, that's very helpful. The points on Oak Hill will all be large radius, because that's all that is currently in the bullhead range, it would be nice it they had smaller ones, but never mind.

 

Peco don't have the plans for the slip on their website yet, but I will make sure to download them to play as soon as I can.

 

I did a picture using the bullhead plans too:

 

 

The wonky cross-timbering may offend some but perhaps it'll help give that 19th century feel. Note the slight kink due to the curve continuing through the crossing, which gives an inauthentic wiggle when building a crossover like this - which you would have (and more so) at standard Peco centres. I suppose one could try to straighten the curve out, carefully cutting through the long timbers.

 

Do you need to wait for the bullhead slip or even splash out on the bulhead points at all? Can't you ballast over the sleepers?

Edited September 26, 2021 by Compound2632

[BlueLightning]

Once again thank you Stephen, very helpful.

 

8 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Do you need to wait for the bullhead slip or even splash out on the bulhead points at all? Can't you ballast over the sleepers?

 

I have been having this discussion with Linny recently, (along with one about building my own points as we have a lot of lengths of bullhead rail that came in second hand from some SMP kits at the shop) and while yes I could just ballast over the sleepers, I prefer the point blades on the bullhead trackwork. Since I can afford to spend more money on this than I did the first time round, I am allowing myself to be picky about things like this

 

Gary