Shunting and Inglenook-ish layout - headhunt on or off scene?

[Ralf]

Hi folks, 

 

Pondering on a Inglenook-ish shunting plank layout and have a question... It's probably a daft question but here it is.

 

Assuming I've got a total of 6ft in length available to me would you:

 

a) - include the shunting head shunt / exit line on the scenic section as per an official Inglenook

or 

b) - have the first set of points just inside the scenic section? Giving longer sidings / more room for design BUT some sidings would only be accessible by taking the entire train into the fiddle yard / traverser / sector plate albeit briefly... 

 

Any thoughts appreciated! I'm torn between the realism of being able to shunt on scene and the ability to maximise potential layout design opportunities by not letting some of the shunting happen on scene... 

 

Ta

Ralf

 

[ColinK]

I think its better to keep all the shunting on the visible section. What I’ve done is added a Y point facing the opposite way to the sidings, one line from the Y has a track leading off the layout (into a fiddle yard in my case), while the other track off the Y front becomes the headshunt terminating at a buffer stop. Easier to draw than describe - but I can’t draw!

 

Do remember that the siding and headshunt lengths are critical, too short and it doesn’t work, too long and it becomes very easy.

 

You also need to think about what couplings you are going to use. I made my sidings the minimum possible length, but that meant the uncouplers were in the wrong place, I could uncouple no problem, but not couple up again as the wagon was sitting over the uncoupler.

[Axlebox]

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_09_2015/post-508-0-20190300-1441396835.jpg

[MarcD]

Hi raff

I. Iain rice'sbox on urban railways he has a plan that is a 3 way point and a single slip. It has the head shunt running in front of the fiddle yard. It might be just up you street.

 

Marc

[br2975]

I kept it all visible, in a length of  5'8".

.

Albeit, there is a little used, hidden,  sector plate).

.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/88144-rosamund-street-low-level-sidings/?hl=%2Brosamund+%2Bstreet

.

Brian R

[tomparryharry]

Hi Ralf,

 

It is up to you, but I include the headshunt in the scenic section. The 8-wagon principle is a real head-scratcher for the uninitiated, but causes lots of fun!

 

Happy modelling,

 

Ian.

[tomparryharry]

I kept it all visible, in a length of  5'8".

.

Albeit, there is a little used, hidden,  sector plate).

.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/88144-rosamund-street-low-level-sidings/?hl=%2Brosamund+%2Bstreet

.

Brian R

A quick ditty, Mr Rolley?

 

I've got a little layout,

 

It's only 5 foot eight,

 

I keep the other wagons here,

 

upon the sector plate.......

 

Just leaving the house.....

[steve1]

Thinking about it, I tend to go for offsite on my layouts. I can see the reasoning for doing it all in full view but, if the trains don't eventually go anywhere, then it loses a bit of reality to my mind.

 

steve

[tomparryharry]

Thinking about it, I tend to go for offsite on my layouts. I can see the reasoning for doing it all in full view but, if the trains don't eventually go anywhere, then it loses a bit of reality to my mind.

 

steve

Yes, I can see your point (pun?) Streetley is strictly a 4 x1' inglnook. Quick to erect; quick to close up. If you double the length, you can get approximately 24 wagons on the puzzle. With this, it raises the solution possibilities from 40,000 to 200 million (check the factorial).

 

I have planned to do a small roundy-roundy with small fiddle yard, just to break things up a bit. My fault: I haven't done it yet.

 

Happy modelling,

 

Ian.

Edited October 3, 2018 by tomparryharry

[br2975]

A quick ditty, Mr Rolley?

 

I've got a little layout,

 

It's only 5 foot eight,

 

I keep the other wagons here,

 

upon the sector plate.......

 

Just leaving the house.....

 

Did you ever see ?

Did you ever see ?

Did you ever see ?

Such a funny thing before.

.

My wife is concerned about this 5'8" tall 'Rosamund' who I take away for the occasional weekend !

[HillsideDepot]

I decided to put the headshunt off stage (although its all open) on Drew's Sidings. Not that I gave it too much thought, I wanted a universal fiddle table (able to take a sector plate or (at some stage) cassettes which could work with a variety of micro layouts. I was also looking a minimum length (4 foot overall) so not having any points was an advantage. I was also not sure how interesting the Inglenook Puzzle would be, so "minimum cost" was also a consideration in case it became a fun thing to build, but not worth keeping. I needn't have worried, I've found it great fun to operate, frustrating at times, but when the mists clear and the solution appears from a long and tortuous shunt it great fun.

 

As said above siding lengths are critical. I varied it a little bit to accommodate a mix of standard length wagons and slightly longer ones, like 21 ton coal hoppers, and covered grain hoppers. It still works, although a cheat is just possible on one siding with 4 short wagons. Another variation, which actually increased the length over that which is strictly necessary, was to model my sidings on an actual location, Barrs Court Sidings in Hereford. That was a small wagon repair depot, and that gives me the necessary wagon variety for easy shunting (a fleet of identical 16t minerals would be possible, but add considerably to the complexity if each wagon had to have its number read every time!). Because the actual sidings are longer than the Inglenook plan (the front road was actually a through road at Hereford), but I fill the ends of the sidings with "scenery" to get the correct lengths.

Inglenooks are great; Inglenooks that aren't obviously such are even better!
 

[Ralf]

I kept it all visible, in a length of 5'8".

Albeit, there is a little used, hidden, sector plate).

Hang on a minute Brian - you mean to tell me there’s not an off stage area on the left? I’d always assumed that that’s how trains / locos etc arrived and departed the scene... Looks like I need to go and find the relevant BRM  DRAT it was model Rail and now BRM - I'd best go and buy a copy of 233 on eBay and then study it further...

 

Also astonished the sector plate is only ‘little used’ - in my head it’s allowed locos to run round the train upon arrival to commence shunting the train, and allowed you to shunt into the kick back siding...

 

Much more thinking required....

 

Ralf

Edited October 3, 2018 by Ralf

[Guest teacupteacup]

My latest plan started off as an Inglenook but has grown a bit.  Still has restricted length sidings and has the headshunt on view, but also has a running line to a sector plate fiddle yard.  Its 7ft by 20ins so a bit of a plus-size Inglenook.  Plan below...

 

 

The top left siding is the sector plate area.  The majority of the layout revolves around a double-slip.

 

Really must update my layout thread as the plan and size are completely different to what I started with!

[The Johnster]

To my way of thinking, Inglenooks should have at least the appearance of trains coming from and going to somewhere else.  My suspension of disbelief filter will not allow the layout to be a completely self contained piece of railway as I cannot imaginate the scenario, though I've seen it done with narrow gauge quarry systems.

 

My problem is that pure Inglenooks are fundamentally shunting puzzles and nothing else, something that did not ever exist in reality.  You have to postulate a sorting yard, with no other purpose and very small, at the end of a single track branch or long siding, which is in itself a prototype rarity.  American style shunting layouts, the sort that have cards that determine where vehicles are going, are much better for my purposes.

 

During the long period away from owning a layout when i frequently sketched out ideas of different sizes that might in the future suit different spaces I might one day have, I drew up several of these minimum space shunting layouts.  A common feature was an approach road hidden by a building on which stock could be exchanged by crane shunting.  A recurring theme was that he building hiding this reception/departure road was a wagon repair shop, and that it specialised in, amongst other things, tank wagons in order to introduce a need to have these on the layout.  

[br2975]

To a point, I agree with 'Johnster'.

.

I have seen a number of 'Inglenook' inspired layouts over the years, with many in a rural setting, where, to be honest, at worse the traffic levels would have seen such a yard closed many years ago, or at best served 'as required'.

.

There may be a goods shed, or industry, the latter probably being the same size as a 12ton van, and therefore somewhat improbable.

.

Some included such things as a double slip, fine to save space on a model, but in a small, rural yard, with minimal traffic on offer, would a parsimonious railway have laid such an expensive piece of p.way ?

.

When I embarked upon 'Rosamund Street' I set out to incorporate the basic 'Inglenook' concept into a larger rail facility, where the 'stop ends' of the sidings disappeared under an overbridge, with the intention of making the yard appear larger than it actually was.

.

In addition, I set the layout in an industrialised, urban setting which could then justify increased traffic levels and therefore enough business to (almost) justify a yard pilot.

.

By use of view blocks, I wanted to give the impression of a line arriving at one end of the layout and leaving at the other end, even if trains didn't always (didn't ever at the left hand end) leave the scene.

.

The longest siding from the 'Inglenook' concept was used as the 'exchange road' where the pilot would set out the five wagons (in a 5+3+3 Inglen00k) for collection by the branch trip working.

.

The outgoing wagons would be set out in order, by a card system, which is what would happen at many yards, where the outgoing train would be marshalled in order to minimise shunting en-route to the eventual destination.

.

From this, it would be easy to incorporate an 'Inglenook' or 'Timesaver' concept into a larger layout design, which would allow then for more than just one operator e.g. the mainline operator and the yard operator.

.

Every modeller has to compromise when building his/her layout - but a little thought can either conceal those compromises, or, if not, at least justify them.

.

Such is the gospel according to Brian R.

Edited October 5, 2018 by br2975

[Ralf]

To my way of thinking, Inglenooks should have at least the appearance of trains coming from and going to somewhere else.  My suspension of disbelief filter will not allow the layout to be a completely self contained piece of railway as I cannot imaginate the scenario.

 

 

Thanks Johnster & Brian for the further thoughts. Yes totally I agree with Johnster that trains do need to vanish somewhere/how! 

 

 

I've gone and errr stolen a layout plan from another forum user and here's where I am at the moment, basically there's 3 sidings (not inglenook lengths but will have markers to set limits if I decide to play by the rules, but I've also included a loco shed (who doesn't want an extra loco sat on display, and a run round loop to avoid propelling trains on or off the layout. Trains will shuffle off scene onto a cassette or something on the left. Current thinking is c5ft plus 2ft fiddle opportunity, but may decrease scenic section a smidge. 

 

It's the 1970s and the somewhere somehow this corner of a vast NCB system has wagons to maintain and lots of them, operation will simply involve shunting trains and forming a train for departure. The wagon shops will be the mainstay of the services with the kick back siding serving some rail served piece of this NCB yard but we've as yet to invent an excuse for a small inconveniently placed siding - maybe I should scrap it, but would rather include it. 

 

Excuse the rough photoshopping and the terrible Templotting, the whole lot will be coated in rough dirty coal dust with puddles a plenty stock will be many and various depending how the feeling takes us! Only intended for home use at the moment but not ruling out exhibiting. 

Thanks

Ralf

[Gordon A]

So much of our modelling is compromise due to lack of space, lack of time and / or lack of disposable cash.

 

We generally come up with designs based on a real operation , or at the other end of the spectrum based on our imagination.

 

Where ever your track plan falls, the basic rule is that it should meet your requirements and provide you with enjoyment and satisfaction.

 

Rule 1 in modelling is that it is your layout!

 

Keep doodling and looking at books that cover railway operations that interest you until you are satisfied with what is on your sketch pad.

In my case I my  interests lay in mainly industrial operations.

 

Don't try and cram a quart into a pint pot. Point work takes up quite a bit of space.

 

Enjoy.

 

Gordon A

[RJS1977]

I'd be inclined to move the engine shed to the right and shorten it (the whole shed doesn't need to be modelled) as it would be somewhat strange for wagons being shunted into the kickback to have to go into the loco shed and out again!

[The Johnster]

To a point, I agree with 'Johnster'.

.

I have seen a number of 'Inglenook' inspired layouts over the years, with many in a rural setting, where, to be honest, at worse the traffic levels would have seen such a yard closed many years ago, or at best served 'as required'.

.

There may be a goods shed, or industry, the latter probably being the same size as a 12ton van, and therefore somewhat improbable.

.

Some included such things as a double slip, fine to save space on a model, but in a small, rural yard, with minimal traffic on offer, would a parsimonious railway have laid such an expensive piece of p.way ?

.

When I embarked upon 'Rosamund Street' I set out to incorporate the basic 'Inglenook' concept into a larger rail facility, where the 'stop ends' of the sidings disappeared under an overbridge, with the intention of making the yard appear larger than it actually was.

.

In addition, I set the layout in an industrialised, urban setting which could then justify increased traffic levels and therefore enough business to (almost) justify a yard pilot.

.

By use of view blocks, I wanted to give the impression of a line arriving at one end of the layout and leaving at the other end, even if trains didn't always (didn't ever at the left hand end) leave the scene.

.

The longest siding from the 'Inglenook' concept was used as the 'exchange road' where the pilot would set out the five wagons (in a 5+3+3 Inglen00k) for collection by the branch trip working.

.

The outgoing wagons would be set out in order, by a card system, which is what would happen at many yards, where the outgoing train would be marshalled in order to minimise shunting en-route to the eventual destination.

.

From this, it would be easy to incorporate an 'Inglenook' or 'Timesaver' concept into a larger layout design, which would allow then for more than just one operator e.g. the mainline operator and the yard operator.

.

Every modeller has to compromise when building his/her layout - but a little thought can either conceal those compromises, or, if not, at least justify them.

.

Such is the gospel according to Brian R.

 

See where you're coming from, Brian, and an industrial location is much more likely than the original bucolic scene of the first Inglenook, as is a generally urban small distribution yard for domestic coal and general merchandise.  I'm not sure how the concept fits with a larger layout, however.  I can visualise it easily enough, but the sublimation of the small yard into the environment of the larger layout sort of takes away the essential focus from it, if that makes sense.

 

I suppose my thinking on this is influenced by my early 70s experience with the E76 Penarth North Curve pilot, and it's trips to Ferry Road and Ely Paper Mill.  Each involved running line work and ground frames, so the rest of the railway was always a feature of the operation, unlike the selfcontained-ness of a pure Inglenook.  Ferry Road, once you got down there and on to the lower level, was very Inglenook-like in many ways, though!

[Pacific231G]

Hi Ralf

Two sidings were a fairly common arrangement for small goods yards both urban and rural and Alan Wright did base his oriignal Inglenook sidings on a real rural goods yard.

I've also been contemplating a short Inglenook with an partially external shunting "stick" as that could easily be built in a three foot long box. The option would also be to make the shunting neck long enough to run the completed train completely out of the scenic section though you'd need some way (a dead section?) to enforce the loco plus three wagon limit.

 

I carefully designed my 5ft 3ins long French H0 layout to enable shunting to all take place on the visible section as a stand alone shunting puzzle - it's basically an Inglenook within a BLT with a five wagon run round and a kick-back private siding to make shuntng a bit more tricky. In that mode a terminating piece closes off the end and it will sit on the back of my modelling table for when I want  a bit of gentle wagon bashing. The thing is though that when I do play with it I almost always bolt a short single road fiddle yard onto the end so that when I've succesfully remarshalled the train I can run it to the "outside world". Even though that's only three feet it just feels more satisfying to do it that way. I do have a slightly more sophisticated fiddle yard (one set of point and two roads) for when it goes out and that enables a passenger train to arrive while the goods train is being shunted so the order of shunting becomes vital if you're not going to snooker yourself.  

 

FWIW this is the plan with the capacities marked. Goods trains arrive into the non platform side of the run round loop. so the goods yard becomes effectively an Inglenook. The agricultural co-op was going to be a loco shed but an extra goods destination provides more operation.

 

For a completely self contained layout I always liked P.H.Heath's Piano Line. On his original five foot version (Railway Modeller July 1965) trains were necessarily very short but with an extra siding it's quite challenging and good fun to operate.

 

This was my take on the Piano Line and and a layout (not mine) generally based on this this design has been exhibited. It was was designed for steam era European H0 stock and is six feet  by one foot. With swb British steam era wagons it would probably come down to 5ft 6ins. The catch with it is that if you want to put it on two boards for portability the main entry point comes right where the join would normally be.so the two boards would be 3ft 6ins and 2ft 6ins long. This would lend itself to an urban setting (or a quayside) especially as the the "main line" needs to disappear very smartly off stage. This arrangement may seem unprototypical but I do know of at least three real termini handling both goods and passengers that were laid out this way. 

 

 

The wagons and locos have been aded to show siding capacities. The layout obviously couldn't handle this many at once.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Pacific231G

[DCB]

Have the headshunt scenic and the sidings in the hidden area. Then automate it and go and watch TV. I find inglenooks tedious,

For me shunting is about pulling 12 wagons out to get at one part way down the rake and making up trains.

My dream layout, the North end viaduct at Carlisle Citadel, 1950s, shunting moves, light engines, Passenger trains even the odd

through goods but just double track main line visible

Edited November 14, 2018 by DavidCBroad

[cypherman]

Hi all,

For some inspiration look on Ebay at the small professionally built layouts for sale. There are some nice short layouts with hidden sidings. They are rather expensive for my tastes but as they come complete but they may give you some ideas.

Edited November 14, 2018 by cypherman

[tomparryharry]

Treforest Industrial Estate used to have around 5-6 inglenook-esque layouts on the estate. Mostly with one or two short spur sidings here & there dotted over the place. There was a run-round facility with a wagon capacity of about 15 4-wheel wagons, and a Carriage & wagon depot permanently staged there. I need a road trip back there sooner or later. Scenic breaks a plenty, with single lines weaving in & out of the factories.

 

Typing this brings back a lot of memories...

 

Ian.

[Bristol_Rich]

There is a brief explanation of the operation of Frampton here...hope it helps

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/90684-frampton-1980s-p4-1883-challenge-layout/?hl=frampton

[br2975]

Treforest Industrial Estate used to have around 5-6 inglenook-esque layouts on the estate. Mostly with one or two short spur sidings here & there dotted over the place. There was a run-round facility with a wagon capacity of about 15 4-wheel wagons, and a Carriage & wagon depot permanently staged there. I need a road trip back there sooner or later. Scenic breaks a plenty, with single lines weaving in & out of the factories.

 

Typing this brings back a lot of memories...

 

Ian.

 

Once someone produces a r-t-r 16xx Pannier tank, you'll have no excuses.

.

Brian R