Jump to content
 

First and last layout


pgcroc
 Share

Recommended Posts

I reckon @Harequin's  suggestion of a clean sheet of paper id the way forward.  If you don't have any hidden storage its difficult to portray the illusion of a busy main line, most of the time there won't be any express trains in view, and unless its a pretty important place the expresses won't stop anyway. If expresses don't stop you don't need an express length platform, 3 coaches was not unusual for a platform length and the GW turned trains round at lots of ordinary two platform stations, no messing around with bays the train waited in the goods yard between trips.  Even Totnes junction for Ashburton didn't have a bay platform.   The GWR ddn't go in for platforms much, not like the NER or L&Y.   My loft layout had a small suburban station which had the loco depot for a terminus / main station just down the line at the next station, (a la Cheltenham St James /Malvern Road  or Monument Lane/ New St )  as its concept. It also had a marshalling yard and a couple of off peak trains terminated there for railwaymen's convenience.   The carriage sidings were further on so ECS came through as well as non stop expresses and stopping trains stopped.  A goods only line diverged from the terminus line off scene.   Congestion would cause trains to halt at the station due to the enxt section not being clear It was too complicated to complete as a DC layout but it's about to get a new lease of life as DCC.

From that I would suggest  storage round the outside of the layout behind a low wall with  simple exit and entrance at one end only   Keeping the corner curves to your minimum radius  to maximise scenic space.    I doodled the concept on the previous plan.  Its a concept which would need tweaking in anyrail but would allow some interesting operation. But its very much for DCC with nose to tail storage.   Location, West Midlands, WR,  Two stations shown, one with MPD and marshalling/ sorting sidings, one with goods depot for freight  concept is most of your wagons and locos remain on view 24/7 .

 

Screenshot (411).png

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 29/07/2020 at 21:16, Keith Addenbrooke said:

4.  It can be developed later, including with additional levels off a second junction (this may need some reworking of the baseboards, so personally I’d put it off for now - but keep hold of the idea).  

 

16 hours ago, Chimer said:

The curved pointwork will take 4 feet off the long sides, leaving 12 feet runs to play with scenically on either side.  And if there's a real wish for something at a higher level, you could have (e.g.) a DMU or autotrain or both doing automatic shuttles back and forth along a raised section roughly where you've shown Flying Scotsman (?) perched on a box. 

 

In a previous early plan, last year, I did have a second level track. I curved it over other tracks just to 'make it interesting'.

I have superimposed it on my latest plan, attached. Gradient is 2.5% to get over the other tracks. Where it would go to now, who knows? It could be modified to run down between the green line and the baseboard edge so will reach grade before the ststion.

I had also thought about a town scene above the storage yard.  Lots of storage tracks are not required.

 

On 31/07/2020 at 13:23, Harlequin said:

operating well on a temporarily installed bridge board.

TBH Harlequin, I am not keen on this idea.

 

Just to let you all know the dotted lines are where I know there are cross bracings. I am pretty sure there are others.

I try and keep all the points away from these.

 

The start of conversations about a second level has thrown me a bit. I was going to have a good bash at the plan this weekend but I will now have to have a serious rethink. Would it be worth doing this? Could the plan be on one level with the ability to put a second layer in at a later date?

I am still staring a Chimer's suggested layout he first posted. Mmm........... Too many choices!

 

I have been working on this track plan since last year. Many drawings done. Nearly gave up but the kids would have been disappointed and I have a lot invested in it.

It did not occur to me how much work it was. That's why I thought I would bite the bullet and put it on this forum. For better or worse!

 

Many thanks All

Pete

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capture 9.JPG

Capture 10.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Hi Pete, don't worry that we still seem to be discussing concepts rather than finalising details at this point - my guess is it will all come together quite quickly, and I'd imagine there'll be a further iteration when you get some time in the garage back home to check things anyway.  The level of interest suggests to me what you're after is very 'do-able' in the space you have (NB: I think your train length fits the space well - this helps a lot).

 

I don't know if this will help (if not, please do ignore it), but I've quickly sketched out the different concepts I've been thinking about, drawing on some of the ideas already shared.  In my experience, settling on a concept I like means the details can then be fleshed out much more easily, as I know why I want elements where I put them.

 

I've bundled all this together in one, longer post.  I hope this is OK:

 

The concept that seems to me to be resonating starts something like this:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

I've used a more American phrase for the "Staging Loops” rather than the more common UK "Fiddle Yard," as trains just wait their turn there - nothing is done to them.  To explain this type of operation - it's a bit "old school" in some ways but works well when you don't have too much rolling stock (you mention having 15 coaches: so I'm assuming 3 trains of up to 5 coaches each, at least to start with):

 

Here is how it can work:

 

Using @Chimer's terminology, the 9.00am Down Train from "London Paddington" to "Bristol" emerges from the Staging Loops via the tunnel at the East end - perhaps a Castle Class with 5 coaches.  After stopping at "Reading" it continues on and goes into the West End Tunnel headed for Bristol, where it stops in the Staging Loops.

 

At which point this train loses it's identity and just waits.

 

Sometime later the 10.00am Down Train from "London Paddington" to "Bristol" emerges from the tunnel at the East End - the fact it is actually the same Castle Class Locomotive and coaches is irrelevant (taking full advantage of the GWR practice of using standard parts to make a lot of their engine types look similar :D).

 

Very quickly, a busy timetable can be built up with a regular stream of Passenger and Goods Trains headed each way - easily operable by one person and without needing a massive collection of coaches, wagons or locos.  You also don't need a lot of Staging sidings - which is very helpful if they're not easily accessible.

 

And...if you want a train to run a few laps - just leave it running.

 

Needless to say, I quite like this way of running a railway: more about running a transportation system than super-detailing individual or specific engines / train consists (nothing at all wrong with that - it's just different).

 

1.  Developing this concept into more of a layout, the suggestion I made previously could look like this:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

Adding a Branch Line Terminus or a Large industry in front of the Staging Loops gives more operational variety, and also justifies (at least partly) the larger Motive Power Depot and Turntable at the main station.

 

2.  An alternative idea inspired by some of the contributions earlier in the thread swaps things around a bit in order to make the MPD a main operating feature in its own right:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

In this example, the "Staging Loops" come out into the open and they do become a "Fiddle Yard"  When trains are waiting there, the adjacent MPD can be used to change over the locomotives (most of us end up with more locos than we need).  It's up to you if you use this to reverse trains and send them back the other way or not.  

 

The Station goes to the other side of the layout, where shunting goods wagons and coaches takes place.

 

This is a bit different - in practice, operating it might feel like having an MPD with a layout attached, but for some people that's what they most enjoy.  I quite like the Turntable near the door - you see it first when you come in.

 

Both these schemes are on the flat - I note you had the baseboards built and installed for you and aren't keen on chopping them about (fair enough if they've been paid for!). 
 

3. My third suggestion does however add a second level, as I mentioned yesterday morning:

 

This is the lower level - similar to my initial diagram, but with a selection of Goods sorting sidings in front of the station (I've used the rather grand term "Marshalling Yard" just to explain it's not where Goods are loaded / unloaded).  There is a single gradient up to an upper level (it's a bit steeper than yours as it's on the inside):

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

The Upper Level then features the Goods Sidings and the MPD:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

As I mentioned yesterday, this is from an American Model Railroad idea published some years ago.

_____________________

 

As I said at the top, do ignore all this if it's not helpful.  Unless you'd like to me to add detail to any of these ideas, I wasn't planning to do any more with them.  Hope that's OK, Keith.

 

[PS: I used a non-standard 4" Grid simply as a lot of your dimensions are multiples of 4 - hope it's not confusing]

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke
Edited for text only as photo no longer available
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

 

 

Using @Chimer's terminology, the 9.00am Down Train from "London Paddington" to "Bristol" emerges from the Staging Loops via the tunnel at the East end - perhaps a Castle Class with 5 coaches.  After stopping at "Reading" it continues on and goes into the West End Tunnel headed for Bristol, where it stops in the Staging Loops.

 

At which point this train loses it's identity and just waits.

 

Sometime later the 10.00am Down Train from "London Paddington" to "Bristol" emerges from the tunnel at the East End - the fact it is actually the same Castle Class Locomotive and coaches is irrelevant (taking full advantage of the GWR practice of using standard parts to make a lot of their engine types look similar :D).

 

Very quickly, a busy timetable can be built up with a regular stream of Passenger and Goods Trains headed each way - easily operable by one person and without needing a massive collection of coaches, wagons or locos.  You also don't need a lot of Staging sidings - which is very helpful if they're not easily accessible.

 

And...if you want a train to run a few laps - just leave it running.

 

 

 

Funny, isn't it ..... personally, I would be perfectly happy for "Hogwarts Castle" to do 3 or 4 laps through Reading at the head of the 0900 Paddington - Bristol before going for a rest in the staging area.  But for me, it's next appearance must then be on a return working from Bristol to Paddington - or after a break sufficient for it to have worked back to Paddington via Birmingham in the meantime - so some sort of off-scene fiddling seems essential to me.  Another argument for an at least partly reversible FY is that if you've got a particularly distinctive train - say the Western Pullman - you need it to run in both directions, and you probably don't want to have to buy it twice .....

 

But as I've said elsewhere, I wouldn't be at all fussed about a DMU doing two consecutive services in the same direction, and not desperately fussed about an un-named (though clearly numbered) pannier tank doing so.  It's just the "namers" that I'm super-sensitive about - which is totally illogical, but there it is ....

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Chimer said:

 

Funny, isn't it ..... personally, I would be perfectly happy for "Hogwarts Castle" to do 3 or 4 laps through Reading at the head of the 0900 Paddington - Bristol before going for a rest in the staging area.  But for me, it's next appearance must then be on a return working from Bristol to Paddington - or after a break sufficient for it to have worked back to Paddington via Birmingham in the meantime - so some sort of off-scene fiddling seems essential to me.  Another argument for an at least partly reversible FY is that if you've got a particularly distinctive train - say the Western Pullman - you need it to run in both directions, and you probably don't want to have to buy it twice .....

 

But as I've said elsewhere, I wouldn't be at all fussed about a DMU doing two consecutive services in the same direction, and not desperately fussed about an un-named (though clearly numbered) pannier tank doing so.  It's just the "namers" that I'm super-sensitive about - which is totally illogical, but there it is ....


Perfectly fair comment - means the kind of Fiddle Yard I anticipate you’d need would therefore be different to the type of Staging Loops or Hidden Sidings that would work for me.
 

Very good point about a ‘signature’ train like the Western Pullman - even more complicated if it’s loco hauled of course (a King with Centenary Stock on the Cornish Riviera perhaps?  I think you spotted Flying Scotsman in one of the photos in this thread).  In my world such a train has to reverse at the ‘on-stage’ Station: either as a terminating train (a short working), as an ECS movement, or in a mid-session break.
 

Hopefully putting forward some different perspectives will help @pgcroc decide what meets the criteria of ‘interesting‘ for this layout - as I said earlier, I think it could then all come together quite quickly.  I know from my own experience there’s often a point where it suddenly all clicks into place - something just looks, or feels, or sounds right.

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Pete,

 

Here's a rough outline plan that keeps things reasonably simple and ticks a lot of boxes, I think:

pgcroc2.png.64ed0f2a0a01efd58fc2cb4b6211f7ec.png

  • No gradients
  • Scenic running all round (nearly)
  • Main line runs through fiddle/storage yard so there is no extra pointwork on scene to explain away
  • Storage yard behind false backscene but partly accessible from outside the layout
  • North side: town, East: country, South: village, fishing port or whatever you like
  • The branch line junction provides a lot of operational interest
  • Shed is justified by branch line junction.

The baseboards are now corrected as per your dimensions.

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

But with a fan of pretty inaccessible points behind the backscene at the right-hand end of the storage sidings (K9-N9) ...... needs a manhole in O8-P9, and a slim, agile operative who can get to it methinks?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Chimer said:

But with a fan of pretty inaccessible points behind the backscene at the right-hand end of the storage sidings (K9-N9) ...... needs a manhole in O8-P9, and a slim, agile operative who can get to it methinks?

 

Yes, it's a bit tricky. A manhole or armhole would be a good idea for emergencies or it might be just reachable over the backscene? (Maybe with a special cranked reaching tool... :wink_mini:) Or maybe the backscene is removable at that end?

 

Here's a first stab at how 6 roads of storage might look:

pgcroc3.png.b71650fd6cfa1165157eae93accc7acb.png

 

The roads are a bit long so either you'd have to stack trains or provide some internal crossovers to make full use of them.

Trailing crossovers at the ends (one on the lifting section).

Minimum radius 610mm.

To run round on the inner loops you'd need to be able to reliably uncouple remotely.

Needs some more thought.

 

What do you think, Pete? Is it worth going further with this whole idea?

 

Edited by Harlequin
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The thing that first really caught my eye on this thread was the idea (back on Jun 13th) of putting the storage sidings behind a wall rather than a backscene, so you didn't need to see them if you didn't want to, but could see them (and reach them) when you did need to - which was one of the ideas I stole for my own "Another last great project" thread.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Chimer said:

The thing that first really caught my eye on this thread was the idea (back on Jun 13th) of putting the storage sidings behind a wall rather than a backscene, so you didn't need to see them if you didn't want to, but could see them (and reach them) when you did need to - which was one of the ideas I stole for my own "Another last great project" thread.

 

Yes, absolutely.

 

There are pros and cons to all the different possibilities. At the moment that line on the plan is just some abstract division between scenic and non-scenic whose form is uncommitted - although I must admit I imagined a tunnel portal near O7 to combine the tunnel requirement with the FY.

 

Edited by Harlequin
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Hi Guys

Just been looking at your suggestions.

I am now going to print all the drawings off so I can read all the comments more easily.

 

4 hours ago, Chimer said:

manhole in O8-P9, and a slim, agile operative who can get to it methinks?

No chance of me doing it! Only word that applies to me is operator, and I'm not too sure about that :D

 

10 minutes ago, Chimer said:

The picture worth a few words maybe ..... with apologies to Pete for the philosophical thread hijack .....

No apologies required. But it looks good.

 

I had always intended to put the tracks for the storage yard behind a wall for the sometimes use of the hand of God.

3 hours ago, Harlequin said:

What do you think, Pete? Is it worth going further with this whole idea?

If you give me a day or so to look at what you have all suggested hopefully I will try and see what I really like.

If I am running 5 carriage trains, which I think will be the longest. do the storage tracks have to be so long? I was thinking if they were shortened it may leave more room for other things like scenery. 

 

I definitely am not interested in a quayside. 

I have never looked at trains 'going from Paddington to Bristol' or at any type of 'timetable'. 

Even had to look up an ECS movement. Shows you what I know. Square root of zero = 0!

 

Thank you guys for the time and effort you are putting into this. It's perked up my enthusiasm. Wish I could buy you all a few beers, (other refreshments are available).

 

Had an email from EasyJet Friday evening. Opened it with dread. It said that my flight on the 17th, assuming everything stays the same, will run as scheduled.

I hope I do not get any more emails from them :banghead:

 

Cheers

Pete

 

 

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

  • RMweb Premium

Hi Pete, thanks for the response above.  As a conversation the process works both ways - it's made me think about how I might one day build my own dream layout and what I need to think about now if I'm to be ready?  So I owe you a beer for that prompt too.

_______________

 

Hopefully the contributions will help narrow down the ideas - perfectly OK to rule things out: saying "I don't like this..." can often help me decide: "...but I do like that."  (I've never fancied a quayside layout either, for example, but there are some great examples around).  

 

One thing my ideas didn't include was a continuous scenic run.  I note that @Chimer did pick this up from your initial layout in his two designs.  I'm going to guess this may be something high on your list, so I hope it's OK by everyone, but I've combined the elements I like as follows:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

Copyright belongs to @Chimer.

 

The things I like are as numbered:

 

1.  Fully visible scenic double track for letting trains run.

2.  As noted in Chris's original write up, all Fiddle Yard sidings are reversible for maximum flexibility with minimum pointwork - worth noting the points are at the front of the loops - nearer the operator.

Only one train can enter / leave either end at a time, but with two continuous main lines as well, I think this is OK.

3.  I really like the aspect of this double junction - makes the entry / exit from the Fiddle Yard look like the principal route, and gives trains lapping the mainline a reason to take it steady, so I think this scores high on realism.

4.  I also like the way the branch diverges from the station with this loop platform - a little less common, but adds variety (the two junctions are now different).  A clockwise train can be held in the loop platform while it waits for a train to emerge from the single track section, adding operational interest.  Personally, I'd keep that line single and think of examples where express trains could be seen on single track routes.  Avoids points on / by the lift out section.

5.  Room for decent length Goods Sidings - as there aren't many Fiddle Yard sidings this is helpful.  It can be designed for shunting while the main lines are in use, and keeps room for the MPD / Turntable at the station.

6.  The 2nd version had Tunnels in this corner - I'd assume they will be included.  It's the best corner for a tunnel as you can have an access on the outside in case of derailment - no convoluted gymnastics required!

 

Of course, when I commented that Chris seems to have a good handle on this kind of space:

 

On 29/07/2020 at 19:16, Keith Addenbrooke said:

 I’ve also seen some of @Chimer’s designs in threads on this Forum, and they seem to work really well for this kind of space.  Keith.

 

I didn't know he'd already incorporated your Fiddle Yard concept into one of his own ideas:

 

On 03/08/2020 at 08:42, Chimer said:

The thing that first really caught my eye on this thread was the idea (back on Jun 13th) of putting the storage sidings behind a wall rather than a backscene, so you didn't need to see them if you didn't want to, but could see them (and reach them) when you did need to - which was one of the ideas I stole for my own "Another last great project" thread.

 

As I say, the conversation benefits us all!

 

Full credit to @Chimer for the helpful cross section diagram below: makes it all look very sensible: it's something I'll think about for my own 'dream layout' project instead of hidden sidings - may make life a lot easier in the years to come!  From the photos, your baseboards look 'average' height, and I've checked that I can easily reach up to 32" across my desk, so it's only the corners that'll be out of reach (which you've said previously).

 

On 03/08/2020 at 11:43, Chimer said:

The picture worth a few words maybe ..... with apologies to Pete for the philosophical thread hijack .....

 

1706499525_Theview.jpg.2eac0c20de82806d01c4b985c4397644.jpg

 

Keith.

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke
Edited for text only as photo no longer available
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Hi again guys

(Another email from EastJet this morning - 'looking forward to welcoming me aboard on the 17th')

 

Right to railways.

 

I think that I am drifting away from having a second level.

 

Attached is the one I like best at the moment.

 

It is a mixture of Harlequin's storage yard, (with 5 tracks instead of 6), but turned through 180 degrees, and combined with Keith's take on Chimer's layout that he posted on Monday. 

 

Would this be feasible? The only concern is with 5 tracks it reduces the width of the goods yard. Could I still get enough movement in the goods yard?

 

Turntable is OK where drawn.

I think tunnels at area '2' could cause problems. Better in area '6' which is accessible from both sides.

 

I feel we, (you), are getting somewhere.

 

Now another question. There are a lot of curved points. I have seen on a few forums, including this one, that they are not universally popular. Any thoughts?

 

Cheers

Pete1945075553_Chimer2.jpg.b40ff730defbc447ce4657092613273c.jpg

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

A few thoughts:

 

  1. There are some conflicting interests at the bottom left. The station needs to be a bit longer and it would be nice to also increase the radius of the main line curve; but the branch will become tight if the junction is pushed too far left.  Worth a little juggling to see if things can be tweaked I think. Reducing the angle between the main line and the board edge would make it easier to accommodate the branch junction I think (and the aesthetic price would really be small ;) ).
  2. Any main line trains entering or leaving the left hand end of the storage sidings will have to use the branch line from the station; could you fit a junction on the lifting flap so that only local services are seen running onto the branch at the station?
  3. Re the goods yard and traffic, assuming it is a local goods depot, it would be served by whatever stopping goods trains run in the area and possibly some specialised services such as local coal trains, but there would be plenty of through goods too, really limited only by the capacity of your storage sidings. 
  4. A few carriage sidings at the junction would be useful for stabling branch trains and would ease the pressure on the storae roads.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Spookily, I had had another go at this yesterday, which included pushing the right hand throat a bit round the bend so to speak, which left room to improve (I think) the left hand throat pointwork.  The branch at the left hand throat remains double tracked in this version, which I think looks better as it has to be used to take expresses (and everything else) to and from the storage sidings.  In fact, perhaps it's best to think of the main line as being to and from storage (Paddington and Bristol) ..... though I'd give most trains a few laps, probably, but only count then once as far as the timetable goes.

 

I also had a go at MPD and marshalling yard, but lots of you could do better at these.  I've no real idea of flow through an MPD, just thinking arriving over the ashpits and leaving via the road below the coaling ramp, watering at the same time.  But it basically just gives some idea of what might fit ...  I thought a marshalling yard rather than a local goods yard, as it's really just serving as a fiddle yard for freight trains, so trains will generally be broken up and reformed rather than being dropped off to particular sidings.  Accessible from both directions via trailing points, only anti-clockwise services need to be run round.  

 

1936689422_pgroc2jpg.jpg.8d5258f41d92d448bc937d53b7ea4c51.jpg

 

Cheers, Chris 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

P.S.  I have used a pair of Streamline curved points in a crossover with no ill effects on a varied cross-section of locos and rolling stock ....

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Flying Pig said:

Any main line trains entering or leaving the left hand end of the storage sidings will have to use the branch line from the station; could you fit a junction on the lifting flap so that only local services are seen running onto the branch at the station?

Honestly I would not want anything on the lift up section other than tracks Flying Pig.

 

27 minutes ago, Chimer said:

also had a go at MPD and marshalling yard, but lots of you could do better at these.  I've no real idea of flow through an MPD, just thinking arriving over the ashpits and leaving via the road below the coaling ramp, watering at the same time.  But it basically just gives some idea of what might fit ...  I thought a marshalling yard rather than a local goods yard, as it's really just serving as a fiddle yard for freight trains, so trains will generally be broken up and reformed rather than being dropped off to particular sidings.  Accessible from both directions via trailing points, only anti-clockwise services need to be run round.  

Very impressive Chimer! :D

I was thinking that perhaps I can add a maximum of 6" across the total width north/south if required.

Get some more scenery in.

Cheers

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Hi Pete, by the look of it there's very little left for me to add - other than to wish you a safe journey home of course!  It looks to me like @Chimer's redrawing uses the revised baseboard dimensions, which will help.

 

In terms of a few final thoughts (others are better placed to help with the details for this type of scheme):

 

1.  I'd agree with @Flying Pig that a couple of carriage sidings at the station would add a lot to the operating possibilities (and perhaps a parcels bay?).  For a junction station layout, they could easily be justified.

 

2.  Personally, for 5 coach trains (suggesting a secondary main line), I'm OK with the single track line into the Fiddle Yard at the West side - and it helps practically, but note: I model single track lines and I am heavily influenced by American Railroads, which have plenty of single and double track (and quadruple) main lines.

 

3.  Curved points: I've (hopefully) embedded a link to the thread where I asked this question a couple of months ago.  The two key things I learned were:

  • Do distinguish between Streamline Curved Points (basically no trouble) and Setrack (proceed with caution).
  • The quality of the baseboards / track laying / couplings and rolling stock axles and wheels are all important factors too - we often expect our track to cover for all these things.  Do have a read:

 

4.  Finally, is it worth trying to add a 5th track from @Harlequin's proposal (rotated 180 degrees)  into the Fiddle Yard, rather than Chimer's 4?  As you note, there is a trade off versus the Goods Yard (personally, I wouldn't add another 6" to the baseboard width - the 32" seems a comfortable reach so I'd work within it).

 

As all the Fiddle Yard Loops are fully reversible in Chimer's design, and as there are the two separate through running lines in front of the scenic wall, then 4 loops might be enough if, as Chimer suggests, the Goods Yard is used as a 'marshalling yard' for trains to arrive and depart - rather than just a local goods yard trains stop at.

 

In other words, the Fiddle Yard Loops can be used to hold trains, but don't have to hold everything.

 

On the other hand:

 

You could soon find this restrictive as your collection grows, especially if you don't want every visible scenic siding stuffed with rolling stock (which can soon make operating frustrating rather than enjoyable).  At which point you may wish you'd added the 5th.  So I'd suggest it is well worth taking the time to draw up both options - after all, it'll be a lot harder to add another loop later if you want one.

 

Why settle for 5 tracks - with 5 you have room for an Up Passenger, a Down Passenger and a Goods train heading in either direction, plus a Branch Train (Passenger or Goods) that will only use the West line to / from the station.  As space is tight, fitting in 6 might eat into the marshalling yard too much - but do see what fits.

 

Hope that helps - it's looking good: I think I'll go and measure my garage...

 

Keith.

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The storage loops are very long (up to 13 feet).  Adding this little lot somewhere around J1/K2 (Harlequin's references, my plan) would nearly double the capacity if the average train length is only 5 coaches - might hurt the brain trying to keep escape routes open in both directions though :).  Needs to be a bit off centre, so the loops to one side of the ladders are longer than those on the other side.  Obviously the 10 coach Bristolian set would need both halves of one loop.....

 

Ladder.jpg.c182c8d018189c1b11280bf825a3075b.jpg

 

Edit .... On second thoughts, much better would be just one ladder with two points and two double slips .... it's too late for me, obviously .....

Edited by Chimer
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
10 hours ago, pgcroc said:

Honestly I would not want anything on the lift up section other than tracks Flying Pig.

Why, Pete?

It’s very valuable space and in the plans above you really need some way to connect the mainlines to the fiddle yard off-scene, as FP points out. Without it, operations are a bit weird: It’s as if the Paddington to Penzance doesn’t come back from Penzance - it re-appears from the tiny station at Farringdon...

Quote

 

Very impressive Chimer! :D

I was thinking that perhaps I can add a maximum of 6" across the total width north/south if required.

Get some more scenery in.

Cheers

Pete

You shouldn’t need any more width and it would make things more difficult to reach as Keith points out.

 

I worry that the loops either side of the platforms isolate the railway from the non railway scenery. It would be nicer if a road could approach a station building which was alongside one platform or the other.
 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Of course!  (Note to self: if I had any sort of brain I might still have something to contribute after all).

 

@Chimer’s suggestion for a double ladder half way along the Fiddle Yard loops could be just the solution for the 5 coach trains desired - don’t think it has to be quite so complicated though:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

6 shorter loops can fit into the four track width - with just four extra points in the middle (rather than 8).  Doesn’t have to be 3 x Up lines and 3 x Down lines in this case, as all are fully reversible, but probably easier when they’re behind the wall.  I must have seen this loads of times for just this type of situation, where width is more of a constraint than length.  Do check the end ladders aren’t going too far into the corners to reach.

 

I’ve added @Harlequin’s compound ladders, but I haven’t checked the length against Chris’s drawing.  I think 5 x Mk1 coaches and a Castle Class are about 60” long (rather than 70”), so may well be worth checking.

_________________

 

As for the station, I agree with a comment @Flying Pig made that there is a trade off between the tunnels (essential) and the space for the station, but I’d still want to stick with the tunnel here for the outside access.  Would this fit the space:

 

(Sorry - photo no longer available)

 

By narrowing the degree of divergence between the two sets of running lines at the throat, I wonder if it’s possible to fit this in, with a shorter outside tunnel meaning the point where the double track becomes a single track can still fit before the lift out section.  Some carriage sidings Flying Pig suggested are shown.  They have to be shunted through the tunnel (not ideal) but are at least on a departure line,  not an arrival line.  By flipping Chimer’s station, there’s room (hopefully) for the station building as suggested by Harlequin.

 

Don’t know if this will all fit - I just checked back in to see which way the conversation was going.  Keith.

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke
Edited for text only as photo no longer available
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 03/08/2020 at 08:32, Harlequin said:

Here's a first stab at how 6 roads of storage might look:

pgcroc3.png.b71650fd6cfa1165157eae93accc7acb.png

 

 

BTW: The main point of this design is that the double track main line runs through the fiddle yard. It's not just a fan of 6 loops connecting to a single feed line at either end...

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
17 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

Any main line trains entering or leaving the left hand end of the storage sidings will have to use the branch line from the station; could you fit a junction on the lifting flap so that only local services are seen running onto the branch at the station?

@Flying Pig, I have relented. A junction on the lifting flap can be put in. The only reason I initially was against this was that I am using Tortoise point motors, (I have around 24 of them), and they are quite large. But, as I will be the only person 'operating' this flap, I will be aware of it. One day I want to covert it to a hinged flap. 

 

15 hours ago, Chimer said:

P.S.  I have used a pair of Streamline curved points in a crossover with no ill effects on a varied cross-section of locos and rolling stock ....

@Chimer and @Keith Addenbrooke, all the curved points I have are Streamline. Phew!

 

5 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Why, Pete?

It’s very valuable space and in the plans above you really need some way to connect the mainlines to the fiddle yard off-scene, as FP points out. Without it, operations are a bit weird: It’s as if the Paddington to Penzance doesn’t come back from Penzance - it re-appears from the tiny station at Farringdon...

@Harlequin, See answer to @Flying Pig above.

 

6 hours ago, Harlequin said:

It would be nicer if a road could approach a station building which was alongside one platform or the other.

I don't think that that would be a problem. Coming from the wall side of the baseboard. May even squeeze a small parking area in.

 

5 hours ago, Harlequin said:

You shouldn’t need any more width and it would make things more difficult to reach as Keith points out.

OK. Idea scrubbed.

 

26 minutes ago, Jack Benson said:

I am in awe of this plan, my workspace at just 5mx3m maybe a tad more generous but I only managed to squeeze in this rather simplistic scheme.

Jack, the evolving layout design is down to all the guys that you see on this thread. I am very fortunate that they are interested.

 

 

It seems to me everyone, please correct me if not, that the first thing that has to be set in stone are the storage yards. Once these are fixed then hopefully everything else will flow from there. 

 

Many thanks again

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 minutes ago, pgcroc said:

@Flying Pig, I have relented. A junction on the lifting flap can be put in. The only reason I initially was against this was that I am using Tortoise point motors, (I have around 24 of them), and they are quite large. But, as I will be the only person 'operating' this flap, I will be aware of it. One day I want to covert it to a hinged flap. 

 

Sorry, I haven't been following every post on the thread and thought lifting flap already meant a hinged flap.  

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...