Warren Branch

[MrWolf]

I think that some of our layout interests are commonly restricted by the space and funds we have, as well as the time. 

The first locos I ever got just happened to be Great Western, on top of which the constraints of space and budget meant branch lines only. I tried building a double track main line when I was in my teens, but it never worked very well thanks to secondhand points and track from assorted manufacturers. 

I also found that I was just as interested in what was outside of the railway.

My interest in the Great Western was helped along when I inherited a pile of books on the subject. Some of which were about the broad gauge era, something that really interests me, but there's no way I can see myself building absolutely everything I would need. Especially the track and locomotives.

I prefer pre grouping railway items to be honest, oddball stuff like the Midland & South Western Junction, the Cambrian and the Highland. 

But then you are reliant on brass kits for virtually everything and whilst I would love to have a go, it's something that I don't have the surplus income for. The Idea of forking out £200 plus for a new DCC loco that probably won't work, added to all the other requirements for going digital has put me right off.

At least my interests are catered for by RTR and kit stock of varying ages.

So it's a good job that I like the idea of Victorian era locos that spent the 1930s dragging a few wagons and antiquated coaches around rural locations.

 

[MoonMonkey]

4 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Back to railway and Warren Branch related subjects, have any of you ever wondered what makes us sufficiently interested in a railway company and a period from forty years before we were born that makes people like myself and @chuffinghellwant to try to represent it in miniature? 

 

It can't be just a creative exercise I don't think.

Interesting question :-) 

I started to get back into railway modelling a few years ago, driven by my child finding my old stuff from when I was a kid/teenager.  That lot happened to be mostly GWR.  I think back then, the GWR seemed a bit exotic.  Not sure though, but I had a fair old mix of stuff.  But now, I live in the GWR region, so I thought I'd make use of the items I had and focus on that.  Then it struck me, doing a layout to show some history of the area my child lives in might be interesting... so I went with that.  I was mulling over an era and thought the 30s or 40s sounded nice, but then the whole VE Day 50th celebrations cropped up... so there I had it:  GWR, VE day 1945! 

[MrWolf]

1 hour ago, chuffinghell said:

I’ll be lucky to gain 15mm without seriously messing up my plan with the canal below 

 

Sorry, I'd forgotten about the canal! 

That would actually make the layout look more spacious, despite not actually adding any more room for railway matters.

I was able to move the mileage siding out about 40mm, to the edge of the existing board, the extension is purely livestock yard, as yours is canal. It still makes a big difference I think.

It might be worth placing the canal board onto the frame and moving that around if possible, to see what extra room you can pinch between it and the railway?

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Making the goods yard area of my layout just 15 centimetres wider has made all the difference to my layout. It has stopped it looking like I was cramming a quart into a pint jug.

An extra six inches is certainly worth having.

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, Gopher said:

My very first layout when I returned to railway modelling was a late post war GWR  fictitious location.  I found it difficult despite referring to numerous books on the subject/era.  I just could not connect with it.  They layout was pretty awful and my first attempt at serious railway modelling.

 

Anyway - I then decided to model an era I could remember - which happened to be BR Western Region early 60s.  I've built three layouts for this period , and I personally find this much easier and more interesting/comfortable to try and replicate this transition era.  I still consult reference books (mainly for colour photos) but it is amazing how my memory of this time helps with some aspects of the model.  So I guess this gives me more confidence I am building a creditable model (albeit never truly proto-typical).      

 

I am full of admiration for anyone who models railways before they were born.  Especially actual locations and sticking to prototype practice.  I think it is a real challenge, and one I failed.                         

At one time I considered seriously setting a layout on the actual day that I was born - Saturday 16 June 1956. However, it would have been very restrictive being just before the change of coach liveries, different BR emblems and the introduction of diesels; and also after some very interesting stock had gone. Consequently I decided that anything that had, or might have, run in Cornwall during the whole of the 1950s was fair game. I've been very happy with that choice.

[Nick C]

16 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Back to railway and Warren Branch related subjects, have any of you ever wondered what makes us sufficiently interested in a railway company and a period from forty years before we were born that makes people like myself and @chuffinghellwant to try to represent it in miniature? 

 

It can't be just a creative exercise I don't think.

For me I think it was probably the vast number of railway books my dad had when I was growing up, along with preservation-era steam - mostly the IWSR and Bluebell.

[chuffinghell]

I did a bit of a sketch

 

 

the shaded area is the extra space, basically to open up the area so hopefully I can use the coal staiths and coal office and it not look cramped?

 

I then had a mess about with the hardboard strip

 

 

I appreciate an embankment and cancel it would be man made but does that look like more natural?

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by chuffinghell

[MrWolf]

I expect that it will once you have all of the ground surfaces in place. My altered goods yard is making more sense now that I have some of the surfaces modelled. It certainly would create more room without looking contrived.

[AlfaZagato]

I had thought the size of your board was dictated by access considerations.   Would the 15cm no lose you those considerations, given you already didn't accommodate it?

[Stubby47]

I would think the canal would be as straight as possible,  only curving to follow contours where necessary.

 

And wider on the corners.  

[MrWolf]

Unless the original contours of the surrounding land dictated a meandering course?

[Stubby47]

Yes, but maybe not over such a short distance as depicted in the plan.

The extra effort in making a straight canal would be a benefit for the canal users.

[chuffinghell]

12 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

I had thought the size of your board was dictated by access considerations.   Would the 15cm no lose you those considerations, given you already didn't accommodate it?

It was @MrWolf that had increased his yard 150mm I’ve only increased it by 80mm at the widest point

As far as space and access considerations if Warren ends up being a little bit deeper I won’t tell anyone if you don’t 

 

[Schooner]

Edited to include some words:

...shows a great little yard, with heaps of operation available. If that's a priority, then adding some surface area to the yard is a really good answer for making it feel more spacious.

 

However, this has come up before. Previously I'd suggested an alternative yard layout (using existing pointwork off the loop):

 

Fewer sidings = more space. This would, for me, still give plenty of shunting oportunities (placing wagons at specific spots on the long siding) - although I appreciate it might not suit your priorities.

 

This combined with the extra goods yard area, reclaimed from the embankment, and you'd have a very relaxed and spacious-looking yard...

 

Anyway, looking forward to seeing what solution you arrive at. Informative as ever :)

Edited October 23, 2021 by Schooner
Verbiage

[chuffinghell]

6 minutes ago, Stubby47 said:

Yes, but maybe not over such a short distance as depicted in the plan.

The extra effort in making a straight canal would be a benefit for the canal users.

like this?

 

[chuffinghell]

37 minutes ago, Stubby47 said:

Yes, but maybe not over such a short distance as depicted in the plan.

The extra effort in making a straight canal would be a benefit for the canal users.

I’ll have a look at it tomorrow and see if I can do this

 

 

Ignore the wavy canal, it will run parallel with the red line

 

[57xx]

On 21/10/2021 at 17:39, MrWolf said:

Back to railway and Warren Branch related subjects, have any of you ever wondered what makes us sufficiently interested in a railway company and a period from forty years before we were born that makes people like myself and @chuffinghellwant to try to represent it in miniature? 

 

It can't be just a creative exercise I don't think.

 

Very simple for me, at the time I wanted to build my first layout, Airfix had not long come out with the 14xx, autocoach, 61xx and B set. I can't remember which I got first, I think it was the "suburban set" of 61xx & B set. Then once I'd decided on a branch line, 1466 and an autocoach got purchased.

[Alister_G]

2 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Unless the original contours of the surrounding land dictated a meandering course?

 

Canal builders, in best Victorian tradition, used to dig straight through the original contours of the land where it suited them.

 

Al.

[MrWolf]

The surveyors must have been drunk around here! The local canal weaves about quite a bit around here to avoid locks.

That said, the radii of the curves would need to allow a couple of sixty foot narrowboats to pass each other?

[Winslow Boy]

1 hour ago, MrWolf said:

The surveyors must have been drunk around here! The local canal weaves about quite a bit around here to avoid locks.

That said, the radii of the curves would need to allow a couple of sixty foot narrowboats to pass each other?

 

Just bear in mind that locks are expensive to build and run. So whilst shifting rock etc is time consuming the labour was cheap. 

[chuffinghell]

10 hours ago, Winslow Boy said:

 

Just bear in mind that locks are expensive to build and run. So whilst shifting rock etc is time consuming the labour was cheap. 

The start and end of the canal are at the same level, had I not already put the canal bridge in place I could have had a lock now the canal is straight 

[chuffinghell]

Unless I cut chunks out of the left hand side of the baseboard structure 

[Graham T]

8 minutes ago, chuffinghell said:

Unless I cut chunks out of the left hand side of the baseboard structure 

 

Is that do-able?  A lock would certainly look interesting.  Probably a pita to make though.

[chuffinghell]

Using a strip of hardboard certainly makes altering the contours easy

 

[moore43grm]

with a certain holiday period only weeks away you could ask SWMBO to treat you to this from JS Models: