"Hawkesbury" - the engine shed area is no more.....

[halsey]

10 hours ago, crackedmember said:

Please see a couple of suggestions for improvements to your design.  The Single slip could be replaced by a simple diamond crossing if you decide you do not need a crossover between the running lines at this end of the station.  Either arrangement could be found.  Goods trains travelling in the clockwise direction would probably just drop and pick up wagons.  Shunting would be carried out by the engine of the train travelling in the opposite direction.  Alternatively a small shunting engine might be employed,  the carriage sidings would certainly suggest enough traffic to justify this, especially with the loco stabling present.  If neccessary the crossovers would be used to run round the train.

 

For the entrance to the loco stabling / goods yard from the  anticlockwise circuit,  having a separate headshunt for the goods yard makes entrance to the loco stabling independent of the yard.

There needs to be at least one loco length between the headshunt and turnout to the loco stabling.

 

 

Hope this is of help

 

 

 

 

Wow you guys are losing me a bit here...………..

 

If it helps I don't think it matters (to me) if goods only run on the inner loop  - it would be good if something could run on the inner loop and shunting could take place as well

 

Just on my wish list - if a double slip could be avoided this would be good as I found the one on the old layout a real pain to use esp as it was in a high use location.

 

I've (by choice) only got a 2 way DC controller and don't ever envisage wanting more than 2 things running at once 

 

Thanks all...…………….

Edited November 17, 2019 by halsey

[Chimer]

I've been off line for a day or two, this has moved on a bit in the meantime!  I would probably have designed this with DCB's "goods loop" before RMweb taught me that facing points were an evil to be avoided at all costs …. which would lead me to use a single slip (as per CrackedMember's sketch) not a double to give trailing access from the outer circuit but not facing from the inner.  Having the whole of a single goods yard "south" of such a goods loop would allow a nice yard on the bottom right peninsula, getting a siding alongside the baseboard edge acting as a wharf might be a bit convoluted - I'll try and spend some XTrackCad time tomorrow ad see what might develop.  I don't much like the idea of running the goods loop through into the loco sidings though - that doesn't feel right somehow.

 

Bye for now - footy calls.

 

Chris

[halsey]

Just started laying the hidden section and mocking up the bridge on 2mm cork covered 10mm XPS using 14mm track pins which literally just push in to place and it feels very secure - 

Looking forward to seeing chimers further input

All good...……….

Edited November 18, 2019 by halsey

[halsey]

Early stages of playing with bridge and workshop undershelf areas

 

I like the XPS/cork above boards idea so far

 

ALSO I really like (and appreciate) Phil's early design suggestion to bring the bridge area in a bit and at an angle so nothing obstructs the doorway this is a very good idea in use esp as at the moment the bridge track isn't cut so the bridge cant be lifted (I will this sort next) 

 

Edited November 19, 2019 by halsey

[halsey]

Just to make a connection with my other "live" thread I have decided to give DCC a go after all - so if that has a bearing on future decisions here that decision is now made - Gaugemaster Prodigy Advance2 and Zimo decoders.

Points control (if I do it) will be via Peco standard motors using power from a Gaugemaster DC controller all of which I have from my old layout.

[halsey]

Hi,

 

As Chimer seems to be absent (I do hope all is OK) do we have any ability to move this on even if only via good old fashioned sketches

 

I think we have actually 99% got to the point of the basic concept being agreed (see DC Broad 16.11.2019) but there are "tweeks" to that being mooted that are/will affect my purchasing and clearly I would like to avoid buying unnecessary items.

 

One of the things I can't "get" from sketches is where items are small medium or large radius and whether its a crossover or a double slip.

 

Chimers input was invaluable but I'm conscious that there may be other "members" who were around last time who may be able to help out.

 

I'm very happy to play (the old fashioned way) with physically laying out the high use points area and buy/get the stock to do so if I don't have it.

 

Thanks all...……………….

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by halsey

[Zomboid]

What is it that you want to take from the discussions?

[halsey]

Hi,

Fair question,

I suppose in simple terms knowledge that what is being suggested fits and then a way of arriving at a "shopping list" of what I need to make up the "agreed" layout - using the 12" grid I can plot the tracks on my boards but the niceties of what the various point/crossing areas involve (crossovers/slips) and the radius are not easy for me to interpret.

And then a wiring in particular an isolator diagram (David has already agreed to help with that for me again as he did last time) although now DCC has been decided I believe that will be easier

I am perhaps too reliant on RMW but it worked very well last time and avoided a lot of trial and error.

I know its my choice to "go it alone" the result of which is without the forum I would stuffed

Cheers 

 

[Chimer]

On 18/11/2019 at 19:20, halsey said:

Just started laying the hidden section and mocking up the bridge on 2mm cork covered 10mm XPS using 14mm track pins which literally just push in to place and it feels very secure - 

Looking forward to seeing chimers further input

All good...……….

 

First attempt got all snarled up then life got in the way …. just flashing up now for another go … 

 

Very strange, typed this yesterday but obviously forgot to press "submit" - some progress made, finishing touches to do this morning ….

[halsey]

3 minutes ago, Chimer said:

 

First attempt got all snarled up then life got in the way …. just flashing up now for another go … 

 

Very strange, typed this yesterday but obviously forgot to press "submit" - some progress made, finishing touches to do this morning ….

Great stuff - glad your back ……………………………….Backscenes and DCC chips just arrived so that will keep me busy for a few days...…………. 

[Chimer]

OK here goes …..

 

Really just shows how some of the suggestions made could be fitted in.  I've shown the crossing in the right hand throat as a double slip which enables the goods loop idea and access from the outer circuit, a single slip here would be more purist by not allowing facing access to the loop, and the left-hand point could be moved to replace the slip in the inner circuit if access from the outer circuit was not required.  The left hand throat has been simplified to use the loop as the loco stabling headdshunt - but I think I still prefer the original keeping this completely separate.

 

The goods yard is just indicative, it could be laid out however best  to use the points you've got - the real time-eater was sorting out the kick-back to give you a track parallel to the baseboard edge to work as a wharf.  The long curves in this area are 3rd radius set-track.  If you did want to go this way, start by positioning the wharf access lines and work out to the station throat - fitting the kickback into the gap would be tricky.

 

Hope it helps.  Your DCC decision will make the wiring much easier as cab control would probably have needed a dozen sections to operate to full potential.

 

[halsey]

OK - I will print this out and have a long think to reflect your efforts - perhaps some of the original did look better but I will put them alongside each other and get back to you...…………..

MANY thanks...…………...

J

 

 

[Chimer]

To be clear …. when I said "I think I still prefer the original", I was referring specifically to separate access to the loco sidings, I'm neutral on the changes to the goods yard(s) and the right hand throat …..

[halsey]

1 hour ago, halsey said:

OK - I will print this out and have a long think to reflect your efforts - perhaps some of the original did look better but I will put them alongside each other and get back to you...…………..

MANY thanks...…………...

J

 

 

 

OK here goes...………….

 

• I prefer the wharf layout/position in the original - mainly because part of my modelling thoughts for the wall of the "workshop" covered area is to be an industrial building with the canal "exiting" bottom left (under the workshop shelf) via a lockgate. 
• I do like the goods loop
• I don't like the use of a slip and, unless you all scream at me, I don't think the operational loss is major (this is mainly an operational comment as I've got one but didn't get on with it very well last time)
• re the switchback, despite your hard work (sorry), could this simply be a coaling/headshunt area?? (have I got that right??)
• If those thoughts could be assimilated into a version 3 that would be great 
• As far as the points required does your "programme" in any way create a shopping list or shall I play with trying to use what I have 
• Will using what I have (mainly small radius items) compromise the look and feel??
•  

FYI - the bridge is now constructed and the lift out track junctions seem to work without any derailing showing as yet!

 

Finally - this really does deliver on my wish list so thanks for that.

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by halsey

[Zomboid]

If you don't go with the single slip, I would still arrange things so that there's a crossover of some description on the right hand side "vertical", it'll be very useful for dealing with passenger operations on both lines.

[Harlequin]

Only needs a single slip for the right hand goods connection, of course. SImpler and more prototypical.

It just adds that extra bit of flexibility so, personally, I would do it.

 

The way the goods sidings are arranged now means that the goods loop is long enough for shunting. So there's less need for any headhsunt extension.

 

But, having said that, the way the loco shed connects now looks very logical to me so I'd keep it as it is. The crossover protects the running line from both goods and shed movements.

 

I'd suggest adding a small fillet in the top right inner corner so that the wharf siding could be taken off the goods loop nearer the top.

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by Harlequin

[Chimer]

5 hours ago, halsey said:

 

OK here goes...………….

 

• I prefer the wharf layout/position in the original - mainly because part of my modelling thoughts for the wall of the "workshop" covered area is to be an industrial building with the canal "exiting" bottom left (under the workshop shelf) via a lockgate. 
• I do like the goods loop
• I don't like the use of a slip and, unless you all scream at me, I don't think the operational loss is major (this is mainly an operational comment as I've got one but didn't get on with it very well last time)
• re the switchback, despite your hard work (sorry), could this simply be a coaling/headshunt area?? (have I got that right??)
• If those thoughts could be assimilated into a version 3 that would be great 
• As far as the points required does your "programme" in any way create a shopping list or shall I play with trying to use what I have 
• Will using what I have (mainly small radius items) compromise the look and feel??
•  

FYI - the bridge is now constructed and the lift out track junctions seem to work without any derailing showing as yet!

 

Finally - this really does deliver on my wish list so thanks for that.

 

 

 

I'm a bit lost now, in particular with what you want for the canal - which surely has to be below baseboard level?  If you could roughly sketch what you'd really like, I could have another go - so far I've just been guessing, and trying to incorporate other people's suggestions to show alternatives.  The critical bit for me is getting a reasonable flow for the main line, the two trailing crossovers (essential for interesting operation imho - and Zomboid's I think)  and the exits into the various yards and sidings.  The larger radius points used here, the better - longs for the crossovers and curved or mediums at least for the exits I would suggest.  Using the slip has the advantage of combining one of the crossovers with one of the exits - a trailing crossover followed by a trailing point would prove an interesting  challenge when it comes to reversing a long freight from the outer circuit into the yard.  Once into the siding areas, small radius points and set-track curves are much more acceptable (again, my opinion) and fiddling around with what you've already got (and templates for what you haven't) , to see if you can produce something that feels right for you, is much the best way to go.  I like using the software because it makes quite clear what can't be done without using impossibly tight radius curves, and just how big point formations are - e.g. a crossover can't fit into 9 inches!

 

As Phil says, the goods loop and repositioned yard do away with the need for a headshunt.  The kickback snake was only included to provide a route to the edge of the baseboard / jetty, with the benefit (?) of introducing interesting shunting problems.  And Phil's idea of accessing that jetty siding from nearer the left-hand end of the loop provides yet another option (at the cost of more time fiddling around with the flow through the left-hand throat).

 

XTrackCad does produce a parts list - this is what it gives for the last plan:

 

Count | Description                    
------+--------------------------------
    1 | Peco SL-86/186 Curved Right
    2 | Peco SL-87/187 Curved Left
    1 | Peco SL-88/188 RH Long turnout
    4 | Peco SL-89/189 LH Long turnout
    1 | Peco SL-90/190 Double Slip
    4 | Peco SL-91/191 RH Small turnout
    1 | Peco SL-92/192 LH Small turnout
    2 | Peco SL-97/197 Short Y turnout
    1 | Turntable, diameter 12.000
    0 | 1319.253 HO Flex Track         
------+---------------------------------

I suspect that's 1319 inches of flexitrack, just over 100 feet, sounds about right and can't think what else it might be …...

 

Onwards and upwards!!

[Zomboid]

Personally I would go with the single slip to make the RH crossover (which I do think is pretty essential to getting the most out of this basic scheme), but if you've had a bad experience with that kind of thing in the past then I can understand wanting to avoid them. Looking at what's been said above, this is very much an unsized sketch of the kind of thing I would try to fit in for the goods yard. Basically have the wharf siding off the bottom of the loop, and then put the main goods connection(s) yard further up.

 

 

I then thought that since this arrangement puts a facing point into the inner main, would it be possible to make the loop into a third passenger line (a bit more appropriate for a station which has carriage sidings and a loco shed with turntable). I've no idea if it'd fit, but this would be the general idea of such an arrangement.

[halsey]

8 hours ago, Chimer said:

 

 

I'm a bit lost now, in particular with what you want for the canal - which surely has to be below baseboard level?  If you could roughly sketch what you'd really like, I could have another go - so far I've just been guessing, and trying to incorporate other people's suggestions to show alternatives.  The critical bit for me is getting a reasonable flow for the main line, the two trailing crossovers (essential for interesting operation imho - and Zomboid's I think)  and the exits into the various yards and sidings.  The larger radius points used here, the better - longs for the crossovers and curved or mediums at least for the exits I would suggest.  Using the slip has the advantage of combining one of the crossovers with one of the exits - a trailing crossover followed by a trailing point would prove an interesting  challenge when it comes to reversing a long freight from the outer circuit into the yard.  Once into the siding areas, small radius points and set-track curves are much more acceptable (again, my opinion) and fiddling around with what you've already got (and templates for what you haven't) , to see if you can produce something that feels right for you, is much the best way to go.  I like using the software because it makes quite clear what can't be done without using impossibly tight radius curves, and just how big point formations are - e.g. a crossover can't fit into 9 inches!

 

As Phil says, the goods loop and repositioned yard do away with the need for a headshunt.  The kickback snake was only included to provide a route to the edge of the baseboard / jetty, with the benefit (?) of introducing interesting shunting problems.  And Phil's idea of accessing that jetty siding from nearer the left-hand end of the loop provides yet another option (at the cost of more time fiddling around with the flow through the left-hand throat).

 

XTrackCad does produce a parts list - this is what it gives for the last plan:

 

Count | Description                    
------+--------------------------------
    1 | Peco SL-86/186 Curved Right
    2 | Peco SL-87/187 Curved Left
    1 | Peco SL-88/188 RH Long turnout
    4 | Peco SL-89/189 LH Long turnout
    1 | Peco SL-90/190 Double Slip
    4 | Peco SL-91/191 RH Small turnout
    1 | Peco SL-92/192 LH Small turnout
    2 | Peco SL-97/197 Short Y turnout
    1 | Turntable, diameter 12.000
    0 | 1319.253 HO Flex Track         
------+---------------------------------

I suspect that's 1319 inches of flexitrack, just over 100 feet, sounds about right and can't think what else it might be …...

 

Onwards and upwards!!

 

That's all truly just the job - many thanks

 

I'm happy to buy new track elements if it increases realism (less train set) so long as I know they will fit - so the list is great and I will work with that as it does pick up >30% of my stock

 

If the double slip is important then as I've got one I will persevere!

 

Don't get too hung up on the canal levels as (don't forget) I'm laying track on 12mm of XPS and cork so this can be cut back to the 12mm ply base to give enough apparent canal depth.

 

The position of the canal is wanted in the bottom left hand corner of the exposed part of the plan (ie not the workshop hidden area) with the wharf "siding" running parallel at say 6 " away from the wall and running for 2ft of its length taking the bottom left as the measuring point which will be a warehouse building facade

 

The area in the last plan which you had intended for a wharf switchback I would like to use for coal as that has a canal connection but I think we are now just tweaking 

 

Rubbish sketch attached...………….

Edited November 23, 2019 by halsey

[halsey]

25 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Personally I would go with the single slip to make the RH crossover (which I do think is pretty essential to getting the most out of this basic scheme), but if you've had a bad experience with that kind of thing in the past then I can understand wanting to avoid them. Looking at what's been said above, this is very much an unsized sketch of the kind of thing I would try to fit in for the goods yard. Basically have the wharf siding off the bottom of the loop, and then put the main goods connection(s) yard further up.

 

 

I then thought that since this arrangement puts a facing point into the inner main, would it be possible to make the loop into a third passenger line (a bit more appropriate for a station which has carriage sidings and a loco shed with turntable). I've no idea if it'd fit, but this would be the general idea of such an arrangement.

 

Hi

 

Thanks for this

 

I don't feel able to comment but can and do see the point and yes I would prefer not to have a slip - but its not a major issue - happy to leave it to others to input.

 

For everyones (esp Chimers) benefit and as "we" did with the last layout last time I believe there comes a point at which the "development stage" needs to draw to a close ……...can we perhaps aim for a final version by close on Tuesday - then I can/will assemble the bits needed and start to lay it out for real - does that work???

 

What is the critical area to get in place first - I remember with some pain last time that even with a plan such as this I started to lay the wrong area first and the knock on effect of being an inch or so out had significant ramifications!

 

Thanks all - ID self adhesive backscenes are on the jobs list next as I found these very difficult to do (and reach) last time when I did them after the track was in place.

 

 

 

 

[Zomboid]

3 hours ago, halsey said:

I don't feel able to comment but can and do see the point and yes I would prefer not to have a slip - but its not a major issue - happy to leave it to others to input

Don't lose sight of who will be using this layout... The most important thing is that it does what your want. So don't put a slip in if you don't want one...

[halsey]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

Don't lose sight of who will be using this layout... The most important thing is that it does what your want. So don't put a slip in if you don't want one...

 

I suppose this is my main reason for doing this - I don't know what I want operationally - the last layout was great and seemed to work BUT I didn't actually use it much as life got in the way towards the end and then we moved!

 

So I am happy to allow others to say if it works and how well it works - it is true I found the double slip a pain and would rather not have one particularly as I think I might go for manual points operation this time.

 

Happy to let the "A" team here thrash it out.

 

Continuing tanks as always...……………………………..

[Zomboid]

The latest designs (I'm not including my doodles in that) certainly look likely to give you plenty of play value whilst still being reasonably realistic. The only remaining variable really seems to be the exact layout of the goods yard - I'd just fiddle with stuff at full size and see what looks good at this point. You won't go wrong with a fan of sidings...

[halsey]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

The latest designs (I'm not including my doodles in that) certainly look likely to give you plenty of play value whilst still being reasonably realistic. The only remaining variable really seems to be the exact layout of the goods yard - I'd just fiddle with stuff at full size and see what looks good at this point. You won't go wrong with a fan of sidings...

 

Thanks - what I would like to get agreed is all aspects affecting  the 2 (or 3) loops (incl use of slips or not) and then agree the starting point, get the bits together and start laying it out

 

DCC is now making the wiring less layout specific so that's a help although again I'd like a loop so I can play with the newly chipped locos etc...………. 

 

As Chimer has said onwards and upwards - "we" are very nearly there which is great...…………………………………..

 

Cheers

[Chimer]

"Agreeing" anything between more than 2 people on this forum is never going to happen ….. what matters is what you want / don't want, and what will fit (which is where I and XTrackCad are trying to help).

 

The first decision required - do you want to goods trains on the outer circuit to be able to access the yard?  "No" does away with the issue of the slip, as that's all it provides.  "Yes" stretches out the right-hand throat and involves using either the slip, as per my last, or Zomboid's layout which requires the sinuous reversal across the crossover followed by the point into the yard.

 

There are more questions to follow, but knowing this first answer will mean the next question can be more specific!

 

But I should add that the parts list should have included 225 degrees worth of 2nd radius set-track curves, and at least 315 degrees 3rd radius, which the program didn't see because I'd drawn them as flexitrack curves of the appropriate radius (which is much quicker than picking set-track curves from a library which I haven't currently got loaded).  And the amount of flexitrack required is therefore around 15 feet less …..