Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

Also, I hate to say it, but @Schooner’s rearrangement of your yard does open the yard up more.

 

The long coal siding on the opposite side to the goods shed reminds me of Grassington on the YDR and Hindlow on the LNWR - I’m not up on GWR arrangements I’m afraid…

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a pretty standard thing - stations need a 'specials' siding for shed etc, and a long one for turning around and storing opens. In a way it's much easier revising an existing layout - I just stuck the required infrastructure in the available space!

 

Just having a quick look at those changes again...it's not very orthodox, but I think it is what I would go for in that space. No need for the short Y btw, the medium fits just fine and gives a much smoother curve into the shed road. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some, even relatively small stations had a coal only siding, which only held one or two wagons. An example of this was Glenfield on the Leicester & Swannington Railway.

 

487191710_The_west_portal_of_Glenfield_Tunnel_(2)_Nigel_Tout_14.3_1967.jpg.4c02c8642185f1110160803bb1ee70e3.jpg

 

Only picture I could find was after closure. It reminds me of Chris's original drawing is all.

 

 

Edited by MrWolf
  • Like 5
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Sorted.

 

Get the glue out, quick!

 

Am I correct in assuming these types of coal staithes would not have a base and that the coal would just be dumped on the floor?

 

I'm only asking because it might be better to put the coal staithes in place, ash ballast the yard (inc. inside the staithes) and put the coal in afterwards on top of the ash ballast?

 

Or would these staithes have a wooden, paved or concrete base?

 

 

Edited by chuffinghell
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I was thinking that too.

 

You might want to use a paved or cobbled area to keep the coal from getting mixed with the bare earth, but this would be at ground level and not necessarily with a step up.


Buuuuuuut, you might just want to lose the base and put the coal directly on the ground. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
24 minutes ago, Stubby47 said:

I was thinking that too.

 

You might want to use a paved or cobbled area to keep the coal from getting mixed with the bare earth, but this would be at ground level and not necessarily with a step up.


Buuuuuuut, you might just want to lose the base and put the coal directly on the ground. 

 

 

 

I'm a plonker! it wasn't until afterwards I thought about it

 

I like the idea of cobbles, I could just ballast upto it so the levels would be flush (ish)

 

Thanks Stu :good:

 

The 'step' on the building is roughly the thickness of ballast so it would become a stone slab and ballasted around it (if that makes sence) 

 

cobblers.jpg.d102e57d6437ce391878f45f5242295e.jpg

 

PS I will probably end up doing a Frank Sinatra with the position on the layout

 

 

 

 

Edited by chuffinghell
  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 18/06/2021 at 11:13, chuffinghell said:

 

Probably, I just liked the idea of another little building

 

Originally I was going to put the coal merchants next to the weighbridge hut but it was mentioned that it had to be close to a siding

 

1028714685_coalmerch3.jpg.625ba87b6f2423b1de544ff52f5204e5.jpg

 

I had also considered replacing the Y point and making sure there was vehicle access behind the goods shed, possible but a pain in the **** to take up the Y point

 

1783466685_coalmerch4.jpg.5f33be2d278fb2724e8b4fb0643d3fb7.jpg

 

Or maybe use it as a stand alone office for the goods shed?

 

 

 

I like the straight spur here better than the Y point version, the latter just gives dead space between the tracks. Can you remind us what the track work is like to the left of the 2nd pic?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
21 minutes ago, 57xx said:

I like the straight spur here better than the Y point version, the latter just gives dead space between the tracks. Can you remind us what the track work is like to the left of the 2nd pic?

 

I just thought the straight spur looked too much like a train set (if that makes sense)

 

layout.jpg.7591e23eefd38e3d1081b0114342af0e.jpg

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had an interesting time trying to find pictures of actual locations and they are usually only visible as part of another picture. Here's what I have found so far, hopefully it is of some use.

 

lnwrcll105a.jpg.2e4860901543fbecd159b6df7c9cb2dc.jpg

 

image0046.jpg.186f197da1c8381649453c4b804560e9.jpg

 

mrkh739.jpg.5e2fa98bf7a615d0b8be333edaab604c.jpg

 

mrkh740.jpg.3bebf067b54ea7da2b4539288508431d.jpg

 

1645518088_OldGoodsYard1.jpg.2a865159571ca25d6ef1827b48c58db6.jpg

 

Coal_merchant_at_Hook_Railway_Station_Hampshire.jpg.e825c4d6f04edebbef18602beb2c21dc.jpg

 

mralv606a.jpg.581ad20ba51781e90f2da56da40f9c77.jpg

 

Most of these pictures were taken in the fifties and I have deliberately left the locations off because I am more interested in the look of the yard and buildings rather than prototype fidelity.

 

I've also added this piece of map that actually shows coal staithes, simply because it is reminiscent of what you have planned for Warren.

 

1891_1to2500map.gif.b9b1f8de35f833192b7d2de038cceb7f.gif

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

 

image0046.jpg.186f197da1c8381649453c4b804560e9.jpg

 

That's a cracker - some lovely period details, and excellent ground texture. Shame about the settrack geometry. Dead giveaway... :)

 

11 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

 

1645518088_OldGoodsYard1.jpg.2a865159571ca25d6ef1827b48c58db6.jpg

One of my top Would Like to Model locations :)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 20/06/2021 at 23:25, Schooner said:

Just having a quick look at those changes again...it's not very orthodox, but I think it is what I would go for in that space. No need for the short Y btw, the medium fits just fine and gives a much smoother curve into the shed road. 

 

The only issue is that I don't really want to take up points/track that have already been wired, weathered, glued in place and point rodding attached


227F3829-A8B7-48FE-8F1A-4718970FBBF5.jpeg.f9bc054954f2829cae283b9f5f71aa86.jpeg

 

 

 

Edited by chuffinghell
  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, Stubby47 said:

I'd leave the points alone too.  The space between the running line and the siding could be a storage area for line-gang equipment.

 

 

That makes sense as I had intended for that siding to have the crane, ballast wagon and PW brake etc

 

Edited by chuffinghell
  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Suggestion:

ChuffingHell2.png.20692fe9b7f12524a486fa9e391b1456.png

No turnouts need to be lifted but some groundworks are needed to extend the yard area forward a bit - and you can say that's exactly what happened in the real world!

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chuffinghell said:

The only issue is that I don't really want to take up points/track that have already been wired, weathered, glued in place and point rodding attached

Quite right too...but do you have to? The main change was to put a large curved point onto the Y at the RH of the loop; the long siding comes straight off the RH point in the loop. So I hoped you could leave the weathered track in place.

 

Still feel free to ignore, obviously!

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I think it might be better to stick to the original plan and pop the coal merchants office and staithes in the bin because that's where all the trouble started :wacko:

 

original.jpg.989db86d5f9adc2e98d293c8192ff6af.jpg

 

 

Its a shame because I like how they've turned out but its causing far too much grief than it's worth

  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, chuffinghell said:

I think it might be better to stick to the original plan and pop the coal merchants office and staithes in the bin because that's where all the trouble started :wacko:

 

original.jpg.989db86d5f9adc2e98d293c8192ff6af.jpg

 

 

Its a shame because I like how they've turned out but its causing far too much grief than it's worth

 

NO !!

 

Rule 1 applies - put them where you want and ignore everyone else.

  • Agree 7
  • Friendly/supportive 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...