Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 17/11/2020 at 21:12, Flying Pig said:

Some questions to ponder:

 

On the loco shed: there is a bit (lot) of rule 1. Whilst the station building I am using was at a station that had a racetrack (both defunct) and that had given me a "busy day" excuse with crowds coming in.  To @Rivercider point, it is small town, with goods and an occasional spike, perhaps an annual weeklong festicval event.  

 

I see this as a moving diorama and I like to see my engines. So rule 1 lets me 'display' them in a bit of context. (This does go down a hole of perhaps having horse access onto trains but not aware of that anywhere).

 

The second siding behind the Cattle dock was there because CJF has put it there in the starter plan I built out from. Admittedly, there was a further one north of it and nothing south of the station.  Now you highlight it @Flying Pig, I wonder if the longer platform goes that side with the SB? The goods sidings then became a feature at the front. I was trying to get some operational complexity, but that currently doesn't do it.  That also doesn't help the private industry siding, but there is now a reason to have that on the 'L'. BUT I liked having a low relief warehouse of some kind at the back.

 

5 hours ago, Zomboid said:

when I see a tide I always try to swim against it. Maybe a Sidmouth style run round where the connection is "backwards", or a siding accessed via a diamond across the main line.

That has been the problem - seeing things and then trying to do something 'different'. But it has forced to look at lots. I see what you mean by the Sidmouth suggestion - as a Hampshire boy (with no real BLTs n my next of the woods) I perhaps need to look further west.

 

3 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

I would angle the platforms and add a connection so the otherwise pretty useless engine shed approach can be used as a goods run round and somewhere to stick wagons when shunting the kick back sidings. see pic

The angling feels like the obvious thing. I'd been tinkering with that after FP's first suggestion. I like the build - I had at one point connected the Shed to the run around, but not considered a link to the FY as a goods runaround. I think I lose the top siding per FP's record as well. I'm still tossing up the idea of moving the longer platform. It would be logical if there was some sense of town coming in top left. 

 

@Harlequin great advice as always.  I must admit, I did nearly lift Hampton Melstead and have been through the early part of the 2018 thread a lot. I noted early on you killed the TT. I had also looked at Woodstowe which has lots of space to breath.  There is a sense from people here, less can be more. (I am also going to look at Launceston, which I don't know).

 

Thank you, this is all useful, and if it wasn't 11:45 at night be off to work on this now!  Feeling more enthused than I have done for some months.

 

Ben

 

 

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Chimer said:

And the whole thing looks much more do-able than the roundy-roundy uppy-downy that I tried to sell you earlier!!

 

You don't want to know how messy it got!  But I learnt a lot about what not to do, and more about what I wanted, so thank you!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

been working with the feedback and a clean Railmodeller template to rebuild this.  There are a few notes as am playing a little.  Three versions attached (of which I think two are just an aesthetic decision).

 

1) The Flying Pig / David version, rotated by 3 degrees

2) The same, but at 0 degrees (the rebuild was cleaner and neater so I found more room)

3) The thought I raised based on the feedback of flipping the station and putting the long one at the top

 

On balance the 3 degree twist seems to work better. It is more pleasing and gives a little more depth if you see it at eye level. I have added a kick back, more to see how this impacts space / placeholder that can go, the execution is probably not right (the approach was inspired by Zomboid with the cross over!) 

 

There is room for the coach siding and can probably create a little more as can start the entry easier. My only thought, even its its current form, is there is barely room to pull out three coaches and then shunt them in.  

 

But the rest is beginning to feel reasonably satisfactory.  The only other piece I have called out is a space for placing stock when changing over per Phil's comment, if I build in some kind of industry or go down the dairy route.

 

I have mangled to do this, in the main, with medium Streamline points which is an improvement from the initial attempt.

 

FP / DCB Rotated 3 Degrees

 

This second is effectively the same, albeit not rotated.  Not as interesting but thought I'd share (also has things in place before I tried to create more space for the ability to run the coaches into the siding).

1740886668_FP_DCB0DegreesSRV5.jpg.14665c947d14c11fe4441bfb8f1f4639.jpg

 

This final one, I don't think works.  I flipped the station so the long platform is at the top. It still gives the coach siding (and the associated shunting challenge) but actually, because of giving space to the SB reduces the goods yard sidings.  Overall, it feels less successful (if any are) but maybe gives more space for scenic additions at the back.209075297_SRPlatformReverseV1.jpg.6fd00b2e29abbaf9d3631f2cb3320d0d.jpg

 

I have ideas on the scenic part (and things like water towers etc.) just have not added those in.  

 

Thoughts? An improvement? Hopefully it reflects the feedback which certainly was a huge clarifying process!

 

Ben

Edited by Shanghai Diver
Typos...
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shanghai Diver said:

Hello,

 

been working with the feedback and a clean Railmodeller template to rebuild this.  There are a few notes as am playing a little.  Three versions attached (of which I think two are just an aesthetic decision).

 

This final one, I don't think works.  I flipped the station so the long platform is at the top. It still gives the coach siding (and the associated shunting challenge) but actually, because of giving space to the SB reduces the goods yard sidings.  Overall, it feels less successful (if any are) but maybe gives more space for scenic additions at the back.209075297_SRPlatformReverseV1.jpg.6fd00b2e29abbaf9d3631f2cb3320d0d.jpg

 

I have ideas on the scenic part (and things like water towers etc.) just have not added those in.  

 

Thoughts? An improvement? Hopefully it reflects the feedback which certainly was a huge clarifying process!

 

Ben

Version  3 is quite like one of the many, many, unbuilt layouts in my head, (though I imagine no turntable).

In my imaginary world the station serves a medium size seaside resort on the South Devon coast.

I assumed that the only goods traffic handled at the station is parcels/sundries in the goods shed. Other traffic like coal is handled at the quay which is served by a short goods branch from the station - on your version 3 this would be the siding in front of the fiddle yard.  In my version I envisaged the quay branch disappearing into the fiddle yard as a separate track towards the front. This would mean extra shunting of freight trains as van traffic goes into the small goods yard and shed, while other coal etc is remarshalled and taken to the quay by a smaller tank loco (O2 or Ivatt 2MT).

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shanghai Diver said:

This final one, I don't think works.

 

Actually, I think it does rather well with a bit of revision and it has something of Fawley about it albeit with more passenger facilities.  Note the kickback is now off the goods loop which seems more rational and saves pulling the sidings to access it, though you may prefer the inconvenience for play value. My two remaining issues are how to connect the MPD and that the goods yard is a little cramped - I would redesign that somewhat but I'm not quite sure how. 

 

The whole has the atmosphere of a seaside town that might have heavy seasonal passenger traffic with big locos.  The kickback could go to a harbour, say.  If you wanted to keep the fiddle yard open for access, taking the kickback offscene wouldn't lose much operation if any.

 

Studio_20201122_111959.jpg.e867666e166b910b93719123008f9189.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Actually, I think it does rather well with a bit of revision and it has something of Fawley about it albeit with more passenger facilities.  Note the kickback is now off the goods loop which seems more rational and saves pulling the sidings to access it, though you may prefer the inconvenience for play value. My two remaining issues are how to connect the MPD and that the goods yard is a little cramped - I would redesign that somewhat but I'm not quite sure how. 

 

The whole has the atmosphere of a seaside town that might have heavy seasonal passenger traffic with big locos.  The kickback could go to a harbour, say.  If you wanted to keep the fiddle yard open for access, taking the kickback offscene wouldn't lose much operation if any.

 

 

I like that revision, it is now quite like the idea I had (but will probably never build).

It is possible to run-round traffic to/from the quay/docks while the main platform is occupied.

 

In my version the goods shed was squeezed in above the bay platform, with just a single siding to the 'south'.

My loco shed access would perhaps be implausibly off the bay platform, my idea being the branch service was operated by a push-pull set with the M7 stabling overnight in the shed with the  stock left in the bay.

 

The lack of other goods facilities is explained that they are down at the quay/docks,  

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/11/2020 at 19:31, Flying Pig said:

My two remaining issues are how to connect the MPD and that the goods yard is a little cramped - I would redesign that somewhat but I'm not quite sure how. 

 

Wood and trees: took me ages to see the MPD problem.  Now can.  Completely get it.  Hmmmm. Initial plays suggest I may need another foot of board...which I probably won't get away with.  I have a better goods siding set up.  

 

Maybe bye bye TT as so many others have had to do!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

You only need a turntable big enough to turn the locos likely to be used on your branch line.

 

Here’s Launceston: https://maps.nls.uk/view/105992299 (annoyingly in the very bottom left corner of the map).

 

Notice that there are two stations right next to each other. I’m only thinking about the GWR terminus to the North.

From the top:

  • Back/mileage siding
  • Goods shed siding
  • End loading dock
  • Platform loop
  • Release loop for both platform and goods loop either side
  • Goods loop / cattle dock / engine shed headshunt
  • Kickback engine shed
  • Kickback turntable

The goods yard is splayed out for access but everything else is tightly packed. The TT and engine shed are very neatly arranged.

 

You can see how similar it is to your plans and flipped over and compressed it might fit very nicely into your space.

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/11/2020 at 11:48, Harlequin said:

You only need a turntable big enough to turn the locos likely to be used on your branch line.

 

Here’s Launceston: https://maps.nls.uk/view/105992299 (annoyingly in the very bottom left corner of the map).

 

Oddly, I started and abandoned a plan with the TT and ES on the south.  This is great, thank you @Harlequin (and I had only found a smudgy image of the plan after your earlier suggestion).

 

You sent me on a hunt!  I managed to track down a few further maps to get more detail.  It had to exist. As people seem to ask for Launceston in varying forms a bit on here, so a kind of "record".  Old Maps was new to me but sent me on a wonderful journey of old stations (and home town).  I had no idea the Winchester Chesil goods yard was that big.  As a kid I cycled through there trying to work it out.  It's quite an interesting set up, especially if you compressed the station to it and used the tunnel as your exit to a fiddle yard.  Winchester (City as was) is my retirement project when I have an attic / shed / room.

 

For now, back to this and a weekend of developing it, hopefully to get some track sent out here in time for the long Christmas break.

 

@Schooner It's a good thought.  Had toyed with this approach as well. May still be the way to deliver it. 

 

 

 

 

Launceston 1954.png

Launceston 1932 - 1934.png

Launceston 1906.png

Launceston 1884 - 1899 .png

Launceston 1892 - 1914 .png

Edited by Shanghai Diver
Added image
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So here is my first version of Launceston for a fantasy Hampshire market town location. This has again been an excellent learning experience modelling something prototypical.  That was not my original ambition, but it has, non the less been fruitful.

 

What I have "kept"

  • The layout of the goods yard
  • The end loading dock
  • The relative positions of the TT and ES
  • The carriage siding
  • The release loops
  • Ability to give the front of the station building some space and a sense of "beyond"

What has "lost"

  • The double slip and the reaction of a release onto the main track into the fiddle yard
  • The full length of the third track into the station
  • The space of the goods yard
  • The second full platform

I have added an additional kick back, more for visualisation than determination to build in.  I may be running a bit close to the back wall on the 'L' (see shortening the station).  I like the sense, assuming they work, of the trains arriving with a sweep in approach.  The fiddle yard seems to have room for a couple of releases for engines to move from the front to the back etc.  For another day.  I have not marked in buildings and key infrastructure at this point.

 

Ben

 

SR V9 (Launceston).jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to run round in the FY is going to cost you a lot of length - it's not just the points, it's the clearances you need to get things past each other.  And of course you need to keep one track clear to do it.  Much better (imho) to use loco lifts (which also solves the problem of reversing tender locos), shifting the stock along to the buffers by hand once the loco has been removed.  The only "con" is you have to be able to reach over the backscene dividing green from yellow on your diagram.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Chimer said:

Trying to run round in the FY is going to cost you a lot of length - it's not just the points, it's the clearances you need to get things past each other.  And of course you need to keep one track clear to do it.  

 

I think it is "hand of god" for now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Some feedback:

  • It's very busy. I think you're trying to do too much in the space. My suggestion: Abandon the second platform and maybe one of the goods sidings.
  • The goods shed needs a bit more track beyond it to be able to push, say, three empty vans through before the yard needs to be shunted again.
  • The reverse curves to get into the platform and goods yard are awkward.
  • The station building will obscure the top left corner. That may be OK if you have a plan for that area but if not it's valuable space not being used effectively.
  • The turntable is a 75ft version for big mainline locos. Probably doesn't need to be that big.
  • Do you know where the coaling stage will go?
  • The points fan in the FY takes up valuable length. If you used a traverser you'd be able to make the FY a bit shorter, have more scenic space and you could have 5 or possibly 6 full-length roads. But you would then lose anything scenic in front of the FY.
  • The top right corner seems like prime real-estate for the engine shed and TT. That's why I suggested flipping Launceston over (in terms of its topology).

 

Edited by Harlequin
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Some feedback:

  • It's very busy. I think you're trying to do too much in the space. My suggestion: Abandon the second platform and maybe one of the goods sidings.
  • The goods shed needs a bit more track beyond it to be able to push, say, three empty vans through before the yard needs to be shunted again.
  • The reverse curves to get into the platform and goods yard are awkward.
  • The station building will obscure the top left corner. That may be OK if you have a plan for that area but if not it's valuable space not being used effectively.
  • The turntable is a 75ft version for big mainline locos. Probably doesn't need to be that big.
  • Do you know where the coaling stage will go?
  • The points fan in the FY takes up valuable length. If you used a traverser you'd be able to make the FY a bit shorter, have more scenic space and you could have 5 or possibly 6 full-length roads. But you would then lose anything scenic in front of the FY.
  • The top right corner seems like prime real-estate for the engine shed and TT. That's why I suggested flipping Launceston over (in terms of its topology).

 

 

Thanks Phil.  Your eyes must roll.  

  • TT - I have been using the Peco template - one approach I have always taken is plan with less space than you have, so fewer surprises.
  • I had been trying to keep space between the station building and goods shed - hence it was short.  Need to work on that
  • I had got some thoughts on the top left, but am now sitting with a reverse map in front of me...
  • CS - I did, it was with the water tower but it was awkward with the space near the engine shed
  • Top right - that is a reason for habitually putting it there in the early attempts, but then, it was kind of a second cousin twice removed from the rest as it was not connected properly.I think maybe it may not work (A church was going there in the above)
  • Fiddle yard, traverser.  I know your thoughts earlier.  A traverser is a possibility and have mulled it.  Am not keen, BUT its going tome a single road engine shed...

I very much appreciate the hand holding!

 

Ben

Edited by Shanghai Diver
I think a taverner is an ideal alternative to a fiddle yard, but...
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.