Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

Now that the design work is finished, Its time to revise this first post to better set the scene of the layout.

 

The plan:

A 4mm scale (OO) layout based around South Brent station as it was in June 1947. The layout is to be constructed in an insulated single garage with a semi-permanent structure, only designed to be broken down and moved in the event of a house move.

 

The Track:

Track is a combination of Exactoscale Fastrack flex track, and homemade points on Exactoscale sleepers / chairs. Rail throughout is the C&L Finescale “HiNi”. All points will be controlled by Tortoise slow action motors, with traditional DC control. The layout its self is DCC, with control by a ZTC511 (which at some point through the construction process will be upgraded to the 611 spec.) The first step with the track plan was to edit a large scale map from the National Library of Scotland to remove the equivalent of circa 18 inches from the length. This was then imported into Templot, along with a large rectangle with the available space in the garage. The Templot drawing then traced the prototype outline, modifying where necessary to fit the available space.

 

post-54-0-63000900-1466017811.jpg

Final Track Plan

 

The Buildings:

Will include the station, bridges, goods shed, station masters house and water tower etc, all of which aim to be accurate models of the prototype. The intention is that all structures can be reused on my long term plan to rebuild the layout closer to scale once we finally manage to find some land and build something to our own design. (Although the planed timeframe for this is still 5 – 10 years in the future!)

 

 

The Compromises

The track plan did need to be compressed in the region of 18inches in order to provide room for the end curves. Likewise the approach pointwork has required realignment in order to maximise the area on the straight boards for modelling the station.

 

At the Exeter end the layout includes a rough approximation of the branch track and pointwork between the Down Main and branch, but omits the Down Loop due to space restrictions. This section is planned in a semi scenic state to allow better photos taken through the bridge. At the Plymouth end the Up Loop (including the bridge over the Avon) have been compressed to fit around the curve to the fiddle-yard.)

 

Coach lengths will also be reduced in order to look better within the available space. I am working on 7 for an express, 6 for less important workings and 3/4 for local services.

 

The Fiddle-yard:

Is a major compromise, the ideal situation would be to have at least 10 roads in each direction (I will have 5). This will mean that stock will have to be taken off and cycled in order to run a full service. The yard will hold 1 local, a local goods, 2 express and a long goods in each direction.

 

Stock:

Thanks to the internet I have found carriage working documents for 1946-June47, along with a 1952 document for local services (all on the BR Carriage yahoo group). I have also managed to find the working timetable for the same period (which helped fill in the freight workings). The long term aim is that I want enough stock to run every train which ran in 24 hours (all be it reusing coaches and locos on multiple services).

 

Why June 1947:

It was a tough call, but there were a few reasons why I decided on for 1947 (and June in particular). First of all the Hawksworth livery is by far my favourite to have graced the GWR. The choice of the late 40s means that you can run pretty much everything from a coaching stock perspective (particularly as the restaurant services were starting to reappear post war). The fact that it allows the use of Hornby Hawksworth stock on the Cornish Riviera Express makes this even more tempting. This date is also (just) before the knocked down the original truss bridge at the Exeter end (but is before they rebuilt the signal box in brick). The final benefit was finding the aforementioned documents for carriage workings and time tables allowing me to accurate detail the services which worked through Brent at that time. I now have an Excel file which details the time every working should pass through Brent, excluding of course anything which would only run as required.Now that the design work is finished, Its time to revise this first post to better set the scene of the layout.

 

The plan:

A 4mm scale (OO) layout based around South Brent station as it was in June 1947. The layout is to be constructed in an insulated single garage with a semi-permanent structure, only designed to be broken down and moved in the event of a house move.

 

The Track:

Track is a combination of Exactoscale Fastrack flex track, and homemade points on Exactoscale sleepers / chairs. Rail throughout is the C&L Finescale “HiNi”. All points will be controlled by Tortoise slow action motors, with traditional DC control. The layout its self is DCC, with control by a ZTC511 (which at some point through the construction process will be upgraded to the 611 spec.) The first step with the track plan was to edit a large scale map from the National Library of Scotland to remove the equivalent of circa 18 inches from the length. This was then imported into Templot, along with a large rectangle with the available space in the garage. The Templot drawing then traced the prototype outline, modifying where necessary to fit the available space.

 

Final Track Plan

 

The Buildings:

Will include the station, bridges, goods shed, station masters house and water tower etc, all of which aim to be accurate models of the prototype. The intention is that all structures can be reused on my long term plan to rebuild the layout closer to scale once we finally manage to find some land and build something to our own design. (Although the planed timeframe for this is still 5 – 10 years in the future!)

 

 

The Compromises

The track plan did need to be compressed in the region of 18inches in order to provide room for the end curves. Likewise the approach pointwork has required realignment in order to maximise the area on the straight boards for modelling the station.

 

At the Exeter end the layout includes a rough approximation of the branch track and pointwork between the Down Main and branch, but omits the Down Loop due to space restrictions. This section is planned in a semi scenic state to allow better photos taken through the bridge. At the Plymouth end the Up Loop (including the bridge over the Avon) have been compressed to fit around the curve to the fiddle-yard.)

 

Coach lengths will also be reduced in order to look better within the available space. I am working on 7 for an express, 6 for less important workings and 3/4 for local services.

 

The Fiddle-yard:

Is a major compromise, the ideal situation would be to have at least 10 roads in each direction (I will have 5). This will mean that stock will have to be taken off and cycled in order to run a full service. The yard will hold 1 local, a local goods, 2 express and a long goods in each direction.

 

Stock:

Thanks to the internet I have found carriage working documents for 1946-June47, along with a 1952 document for local services (all on the BR Carriage yahoo group). I have also managed to find the working timetable for the same period (which helped fill in the freight workings). The long term aim is that I want enough stock to run every train which ran in 24 hours (all be it reusing coaches and locos on multiple services).

 

Why June 1947:

It was a tough call, but there were a few reasons why I decided on for 1947 (and June in particular). First of all the Hawksworth livery is by far my favourite to have graced the GWR. The choice of the late 40s means that you can run pretty much everything from a coaching stock perspective (particularly as the restaurant services were starting to reappear post war). The fact that it allows the use of Hornby Hawksworth stock on the Cornish Riviera Express makes this even more tempting. This date is also (just) before the knocked down the original truss bridge at the Exeter end (but is before they rebuilt the signal box in brick). The final benefit was finding the aforementioned documents for carriage workings and time tables allowing me to accurate detail the services which worked through Brent at that time. I now have an Excel file which details the time every working should pass through Brent, excluding of course anything which would only run as required.


signal plan

A59F4DCE-4E4C-4040-B0B3-49DBA4CAC0BB.jpeg

 

Contents:

Page 1-2: The Design Phase

Page 3: Baseboard Construction

Page 2: Goods Shed Design

Page 3: Start of Track Building

Water tower

Banking instructions

 

 

post-54-0-91630100-1456397308_thumb.jpeg

Edited by The Fatadder
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

New year been and gone, and I'm sat downstairs with the baby trying to give my wife some sleep...
I thought it's about time I started summarising the loco fleet on here. Eventually this should be moved to page one and also contain links to the appropriate blog pages.....

Express Passenger - all in G crest W unless stated.

  • 6027 King Richard I - Lined Green G crest W - Hornby model rebranded to late GWR livery and renamed with Modelmasters nameplates. 

 

  • 6013 King Henry VIII - Lined Green G crest W - Hornby model rebranded to late GWR livery and renamed with Modelmasters nameplates.
  • IMG_0641.JPG
  • 6000 King George V - Lined Green G crest W  - Hornby model rebranded to late GWR livery and renamed with Modelmasters nameplates and PDK bell.
  • 5029 Nunney Castle - Lined Green G crest W - Hornby model rebranded to late GWR livery and renamed with Modelmasters nameplates (tender swapped with 4085) -  need to make transfer to repaint nameplate mount
  • 4085 Berkeley Castle - Lined Green G crest W  - Hornby model with tender swap and renamed with Modelmasters nameplates.
  • 5071 Spitfire - Lined Green G crest W  - Hornby model  renamed with Modelmasters nameplates.
  • APC_0001.jpg
  • 21c111 Tavistock - Southern Green - West Country for use on Plymouth Exeter M Set   - Hornby model which has been renamed with Modelmasters transfers - I have an RT Models as built narrow cab to build for this
  • 4025 - Black G crest W - Hornby model resprayed into GWR wartime black
  • 22 Mallard - LNER Garter Blue - SE Finecast kit - kit build needs to be finished 

Mixed Traffic

  • 4925 Eynsham Hall - Lined Green G crest W - Bachmann model on Comet chassis -  Should be in Wartime Black (will eventually get round to respraying in black)
  • 6971 Athelhampton Hall - Lined Green G crest W - Bachmann model rebuilt with Brassmasters kit, completely relined. 
  • IMG_2801.JPG
  • 6829 Burmington Grange - Wartime Black - Hornby model resprayed into GWR black
  • IMG_0640.JPG
  • 6808 Beenham Grange - GWR Green
  • 7804 Baydon Manor - GWR Green - Mitchell kit with Hornby tender. 
  • 08DE4A70-80F6-44E1-90A5-AE7FFC237108.jpeg
  • 1004 County of Somerset - G crest W - Rebuilt Dapol model (with 8f firebox, new chimney, steam pipes, cab roof) on a Comet Chassis.  - Tender still needs lining, while loco has pickup issues.
  • BF468F4F-C41E-4351-AC14-1A7B197B6A52.jpeg
  • 9018 Dukedog - GWR Green - substitute for bulldog, then for freight
  • 7316 - Mitchell kit in GWR Green - N
  • 81365687-D91C-4389-9C0C-BBECC9D6E824.jpeg
  •  3449 Nightingale -Bird Class - GWR Green - Second hand scratch built model with significant enhancement 
  • C0E55D9E-8BA2-4A7C-A585-B663D9E756F5.jpeg
  • Bulldog Straight Frame - to buy, either Finney kit or wait for Bachmann, (if not available by layout completion then definitely the kit.)
  • Bulldog Curved Frame - to buy as above

Heavy Freight

  • 2846 - 2800 Class - GWR Green - Needs new tender wheels + Pending number plates
  • 4855- 2884 Class - GWR Green - Hornby 2884 class converted with etched shutters, scratch built roof vents and a 3d printed tender oil tank.
  • FF1784F4-6E38-4229-B8E7-65358C752BB1.jpeg
  • 7250 - 7200 Class - GWR Green - Pending number plates
  • 4292 - 4200 Class - Wartime Black 
  • IMG_1519.JPG
  • 77285 - WD Austerity 2-8-0
  • 4707 - G crest W green - PDK Kit build - still needs DCC fitting and a rebuild of the loco pickups 
  • ED8CB925-AA46-422D-AA64-3B968732BE52.jpeg

Local Freight

  • 5798 -5700 class - GWR green - Bachmann model fitted with etched number plates.
  •  2213 -2251 class - Shirtbutton - Finney kit, still needs chassis building
  • EF897E23-70C0-470C-A8CB-DB0C9132B7AF.jpeg

Tanks

  • 4526 - 4500 Class
  • 4582 - 4575 Class
  • 4547 - 4500 Class - Bachmann model repainted into Wartime Black livery 
  • A7C40F38-1F7C-432E-BC48-465626988B3B.jpeg
  • 1470 - 1400 Class - DJM models which was converted from a 58xx and renumbered / rebranded to late GWR.  Currently is missing one number plate etch (which is somewhere on the workshop floor)47D69BE5-B58D-44C4-B392-E92B141455F4.jpeg
  • 5108 - 5100 Class - weathered Hornby model, on the blocks to be replaced with either a new Hornby or a Finney kit
  • 7427 - 7400 Class - Bachmann 64xx converted to the 74xx 
  • ACF2D145-5BAD-40DD-8BE1-D7C00632A4F3.jpeg
  • 1364 - 1360 Class - Kernow Models livery prototype (unpowered)
  • C7C7A710-940D-46D6-8065-DD74F9C45CF3.jpeg

Looking at this I would say I have enough passenger and heavy freight locos for the moment. With the gaps tending towards the smaller freight locomotives. I think the addition of at least one 4300 is very important at the very least. The other gaps are more specific, with a 4700 for the milk or night parcels, and a pair of bulldogs to assist on Rattery bank. I also need to eventually add another 4575 having seen mention of a pair of 4565 powering one of the Plymouth Exeter stoppers... there will also likely be a SR N class added to work the freight equivalent of the route knowledge turn I have the WC for.

I'd certainly welcome any further feedback as to where there are gaps.A recent promotion at work, means I now need to spend most of my time during the week travelling between Madrid and Sevilla. Unfortunately this is leaving practically no time at all for modelling when I get home. It is however leaving plenty of time for layout design (even if it does mean that when I get to airport security I am carrying an iPad, company laptop and my laptop for Templot!)

Edited by The Fatadder
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one major issue with the plan so far, it requires 1 diamond, 1 single slip and 1 double slip. And I can't remember how to do it in Templot!

 

Hi Rich,

 

For a detailed tutorial on slips in Templot, click help > watch a video > single slip menu item.

 

Or watch it (in poorer image quality) here: https://flashbackconnect.com/Movie.aspx?id=RxdwQczwCvgPpdDu1OJJhA2

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Good luck with this project Rich, I'll be watching with interest for obvious reasons.If you need any prototype photos for inspiration, give me a shout.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Good luck Rich.

 

I did a huge amount of sold searching before converting, but I really think it was the right thing to do at this stage in my life! Don't be afraid to change your mind!

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Oddly despite having now lived in Gloucestershire for almost 4 years, the local area hasn’t had any draw on my modelling interest…

 

 

That's a shame, as many believe that Gloucestershire has an extremely rich railway heritage. It helps if you like the Midland Railway as well, of course.

Edited by Captain Kernow
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Good luck Rich.

I did a huge amount of sold searching before converting, but I really think it was the right thing to do at this stage in my life! Don't be afraid to change your mind!

Kind regards,

Nick.

 

Going to seriously think about it, I have two locks on the bench at the moment. If I can make the outside cylinders reliably clear the crank pin I will probably stick with p4, if not then I think it will be time for a change.

 

 

That's a shame, as many believe that Gloucestershire has an extremely rich railway heritage. It helps if you like the Midland Railway as well, of course.

It's strange, in that I find the historic prototype around her fascinating, particularly the Sharpness branch and the old Severn Bridge). like wise I tend to find it an interesting subject to see on other layouts. I think I'm probably just too keen on large GW passenger locos...
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Following up on the comments I have received previously about the lack of operational interest on my previous plan. I have been looking at alternative options. Seeing the track plan for South Brent on the National Library of Scotland maps website, got me thinking along slightly different lines to my previous plan.

The aim remains the same, I want a layout on which I can just watch trains go by (which must be able to handle a King with at least 6 or 7 coaches behind it.) But in order to future proof (both in terms of construction interest and running interest) I want to ensure there is plenty of additional running possibilities. Despite much sole searching, it will still be P4 (I think… Nick’s thoughts on Horrabridge mirror my own thinking at the moment, with a lack of time and another baby on the way certainly making a variant of OO sound tempting. The main thing putting me off is that I will still need to build all the points, and if I am building track I may as well do it properly…

Location wise is still a bit up in the air, but will almost certainly be either between Bristol and Weston, or somewhere in West Devon. I am still inclined to the former, given that is where the majority of my existing stock was based upon, but Devon has much more of a personal attachment. Oddly despite having now lived in Gloucestershire for almost 4 years, the local area hasn’t had any draw on my modelling interest…

So, back on topic.
With the idea for a compact junction station in my head, I looked at a few options on NLS maps, trying to get some ideas. But attention kept coming back to Brent. After running a ruler over the prototype it was clear that about 2ft would need to be chopped out of the station area (putting to rest any inclining of making an accurate model). So a couple of evenings were spent with the GIMP programme chopping up the map to remove 2ft from the centre of the map, and then to realign all of the yard tracks etc. to adjust. This necessitated moving the goods shed from one of the loops into a spur siding, and the removal of the up / down refuge sidings / loops.

This was then imported into Templot, upon which the basic plan was then traced out. This all appears to have worked (so far), as shown below. There is one major issue with the plan so far, it requires 1 diamond, 1 single slip and 1 double slip. And I can't remember how to do it in Templot! So for the moment (while I practice using Templot to make slips) I have just roughly included these as 2 lengths of plane track and a point. Next week’s evenings in Toulouse ought to give a good chance to try and get to grip with it.

The second issue with the slips is that I have a horrible feeling that they will need to be bespoke, I had really hoped to be able to use the P4TrackCo product here….


The plan (assuming the final Templot file is workable) will be that Phase 1 is the construction of the mainline. I am tempted to initially leave out the points (maybe a length of plain track inserted filling the points gap). This will enable trains to run, and the track (particularly the curves) to be thoroughly tested. At the same time the major structural work will be completed on the embankments, viaduct, tunnel and the river / roads.

The second phase will be to slowly add in the track for the yard, before finally moving onto the major scenic work, ballasting etc.

The one area I am not completely happy with is the tunnel, separated for the main and branch. It feels a bit implausible. Ideally I would have liked a bigger separation between the branch track and the mainline, in order the branch could go around the hill in a cutting, while the main goes through it. But I don’t think there is enough space for that to look right. I guess the other option is to use some sort of farm bridge. On the viaduct side, the bottom left corner (not included on the plan below) as the hill starts to rise will be covered in trees. The idea being that the train comes off the viaduct and disappears into the woods.

Would welcome any feedback.post-54-0-91630100-1456397308_thumb.jpeg

 

In both cases it's about 25 inches through the exit track into the yard, something I had completely missed (only focusing on the radius of the main line curves (the inner is 39inches and the outer 42inch.). The branch curve is tighter (30inch), and will be gauge widened & have a check rail.

I think the 2 curved points are currently B7s, assume I need to both increace the length and reduce the crossing angle. Though I'm guessing the difficulty will be getting the necessary change in angle In order to align with the rest of the track. In terms of stock, I will at the very least need to be able to get various panniers, Collett goods, and 4500 prairies through these points, and around the branch curve,
 

Something to have a play with tonight when I get home....

 

After some major redrawing, I've managed to get the two curved points and the diamond to a 31inch radius, still a lot tighter than I would like, so would welcome advice as to whether it will reliably work. The points will now be C10s

Once this was complete I then added plane diamonds in the place of the two slips (figuring it's not worth finishing them off nicely until I have the rest of the plan finalised.)

There is one area on which I would like some advice. The middle line in the yard (runaround loop I guess), I am struggling to get it to connect up to the two points when I keep it in the prototype position without an s curve. I think moving the point to the branch platform line would enable a much better curve, however I am interested to know if this is an issue from the perspective of the prototype.  The change is showed below, originally the right hand side of the layout mirrored the left, with the branch platform served by the single slip, and the middle line served by a RH point out of the bottom loop.

Updated drawings will follow later, at which point I will try and upload the .box file on the temp lot club...

 

My biggest concern now is going to be the double slip on the left of the layout, and whether I have made it too tight.  I can see tomorrow night requiring another rework in order to realign it...

post-54-0-04163000-1456526440_thumb.jpg

Edited by The Fatadder
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

And another update.

 

I think this is probably the final iteration, so would definitely welcome feedback as to whether this is a viable plan.  Details on both double slips have been added and the branch has been connected up properly now.

 

The potential issue,

The two curved points (possibly also the double slip) include a curve which gets close to 750mm radius on one, and about 850 on another.  I understand the minimum radius should be around 1000mm.

 

So the question is, will this work?

And what can be done to mitigate the impact.  I had been planning fixed buffers and 3 link couplings, I realise as a minimum sprung buffers will be needed.  Would using a different coupling help?

 

I suspect at the end of the day, this may end up as the deciding factor which will decide if it remains in p4, or hand made points in OO....

 

  post-54-0-38089400-1456593719_thumb.jpg

 

The updated box file is also attached

Inspired by Brent.box

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Better to build something that isn't compromised from the start Rich.

 

That is my thinking, very much based on Iain Rice's philosophy. If it is too tight to be workable in P4, do it in 00. Otherwise you will potentially be setting yourself up for a fall, something that I hope I have avoided in my own modelling.

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Better to build something that isn't compromised from the start Rich.

That is my thinking, very much based on Iain Rice's philosophy. If it is too tight to be workable in P4, do it in 00. Otherwise you will potentially be setting yourself up for a fall, something that I hope I have avoided in my own modelling.

Kind regards,

Nick.

I think the answer may be to do some tests, printing off the templates for the worst part then modelling the curves and doing some test running.

 

If it fails, then it's back to the drawing board. I am seriously thinking that I would maintain Kites Croft as a small P4 layout (meaning the 4 finished p4 locos will have a home) and build this plan in OO. Then in 4 or 5years time when we eventually get round to moving, can re consider moving back to P4 properly.

 

It does mean that the majority of my modern image stock becomes completely useless, but it hasn't come out of the box since I started modelling steam anyway, so selling it all off probably isn't a bad call....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

You could get away without 'ye olde tunnel' as both lines run into cuttings, just line them with dry stone wall with short trees on top and around. Your trains will just disappear behind the walls and into the fiddle yard?

I did think about that as an option, (and may yet still revert to it)

 

The prototype Brent station, does have a tunnel not that far along the line towards London (and for that matter a viaduct not to far in the Plymouth direction. I have just applied a fair bit of compression in order to get it closer to the station.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

After some major redrawing, I've managed to get the two curved points and the diamond to a 31inch radius, still a lot tighter than I would like, so would welcome advice as to whether it will reliably work. The points will now be C10s

 

Once this was complete I then added plane diamonds in the place of the two slips (figuring it's not worth finishing them off nicely until I have the rest of the plan finalised.)

 

There is one area on which I would like some advice. The middle line in the yard (runaround loop I guess), I am struggling to get it to connect up to the two points when I keep it in the prototype position without an s curve. I think moving the point to the branch platform line would enable a much better curve, however I am interested to know if this is an issue from the perspective of the prototype.  The change is showed below, originally the right hand side of the layout mirrored the left, with the branch platform served by the single slip, and the middle line served by a RH point out of the bottom loop.

 

Updated drawings will follow later, at which point I will try and upload the .box file on the temp lot club...

 

My biggest concern now is going to be the double slip on the left of the layout, and whether I have made it too tight.  I can see tomorrow night requiring another rework in order to realign it...

attachicon.gifCapture2.JPG

 

The big problem with taking the runround line lead off the platform line is that you potentially shorten the amount of length available to run round - which will be further exacerbated by having to move back the bracketed Branch Platform to Up Main and Branch Platform to Branch bracketed Starting Signals in order to protect the revised turnout position.  Nothing particularly wrong in doing it but that is the price you pay and one where you carefully need to check that you are left with sufficient standage for a branch train, including the engine, between signals in in the Branch Platform.

 

The other effect is that you are also shortening  the loop siding although as all the trap points were individual for each siding you don't have to worry about that but it does shorten the loop siding even more of course.

 

It would also affect the signalling although that would really be limited to the Branch Home Signal and Down Loop Inner Home and these might be off scene anyway.

Edited by The Stationmaster
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

The big problem with taking the runround line lead off the platform line is that you potentially shorten the amount of length available to run round - which will be further exacerbated by having to move back the bracketed Branch Platform to Up Main and Branch Platform to Branch bracketed Starting Signals in order to protect the revised turnout position.  Nothing particularly wrong in doing it but that is the price you pay and one where you carefully need to check that you are left with sufficient standage for a branch train, including the engine, between signals in in the Branch Platform.

 

The other effect is that you are also shortening  the loop siding although as all the trap points were individual for each siding you don't have to worry about that but it does shorten the loop siding even more of course.

 

It would also affect the signalling although that would really be limited to the Branch Home Signal and Down Loop Inner Home and these might be off scene anyway.

Thanks for the input, very handy to know the impact.

I'm going to redraw the layout in OO this evening and see if the more generous minimum radius means I can move the point. My thought is to shift the cattle pens to the bottom right spur, and have 2 A7 points off the main yard track and the branch directly off the slip.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I did think about that as an option, (and may yet still revert to it)

 

The prototype Brent station, does have a tunnel not that far along the line towards London (and for that matter a viaduct not to far in the Plymouth direction. I have just applied a fair bit of compression in order to get it closer to the station.

That's Marley Tunnels (two single bore tunnels), just over one mile to the east of the village. Photos exist of the western (and eastern) portals if required.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

If you use GW geometry, instead of REA geometry turnouts you will gain a little bit in terms of radii for the same crossing angles. Also there is EM gauge as a compromise on gauge.

I think i am right in thinking the min radius for EM is still >800 with greater still recommended for large locos and long coaches?

 

Will have a play with the GW crossings, I hadn't realised the actual angles were different. It's not going to find me a circa 300mm improvement in radius, but might make the OO plan work better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

That's Marley Tunnels (two single bore tunnels), just over one mile to the east of the village. Photos exist of the western (and eastern) portals if required.

Thanks, I think that has solved my issues! If the prototype has 2 single bores it's not so implausible that my branch would be in a third bore!

 

Now looking at your thread on the tunnel works on old rmweb http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=36887

Edited by The Fatadder
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

A little more Templot progress,

 

The tighter OO min radius and the GW points has helped to make a little more space in the London end of the yard. This means the point for the loop is moved out of the platform. There are two options, the prototype (in blue) with a shorter loop, or the red option

I'm undecided as to which I prefer.

 

 

If this goes ahead in OO, I need a standard. Some P4 stock will need converting back, this will still have sprung w irons etc and will likely get Gibson wheels. Locos will all need to stay with the OEM wheel sets (assuming recent designs) for older toolings at the least an etched chassis will be built, while kits will likely end up with a mix of romfords for the county and Saint (as they came with the kit) and gibsons henceforth. I also like the idea of being able to use bog standard peco track in the fiddleyard, but that is not critical)

what would best standard to go for?post-54-0-31927800-1456698359_thumb.jpeg

Edited by The Fatadder
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

In the end went for option 3, swapping the hand of the blue point and improving the angles. I think the plan is now ready to add the slips and catch points. Along with the fiddleyard

 

I had hoped to save time and just use some long radius Peco in the yard, but it looses too much length. The points must be on the end of the curve to enable (in each direction) plus 6 coaches in one loop, and a loco plus 4 in the next

Ideally a third road will be added to contain a long casset (along the lines of Peterborough North) for adding extra formations onto the layout.

. The branch will have a sector plate at the end of the tunnel.

 

im hoping that baseboard construction can be completed over Easter, in the mean time need to print out the templates and position stock to prove it all works

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.